[aur-general] Removal of x86_64-specific and opera flashplugin packages

Evangelos Foutras foutrelis at gmail.com
Wed Jan 14 07:21:34 EST 2009

Evangelos Foutras wrote:
> Hello fellow TUs,
> I have come across people who picked a flashplugin package from the 
> AUR over the one in [extra]. I feel that x86_64 flashplugin packages 
> should be removed from the AUR now that the official one supports both 
> architectures. Furthermore, Opera seems to get along just fine with 
> flashplugin from [extra] so we don't need Opera-specific packages either.
> Packages in question are:
> http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=18096 (flashplayer-opera64)
> http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=21601 (flashplugin-alpha-64)
> http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=17442 (flashplugin-beta-opera)
> http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=18695 (flashplugin-mozilla, 
> maintainer believes this should stay because "the official plugin 
> doesn't have mms.cfg" - not sure what this is :>)
> http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=14074 (flashplugin-opera)
> http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=21607 (flashplugin-x86_64)
> From the above, I'd say that the following can be safely deleted:
> flashplayer-opera64
> flashplugin-alpha-64
> flashplugin-beta-opera
> flashplugin-opera
> flashplugin-x86_64
> Any opinions on this? Do you think we should proceed with the removal 
> of these packages in order to avoid confusion between them and 
> flashplugin from [extra]? 

I went ahead and deleted all six packages quoted in my previous email.

Also, I'm cc'ing the maintainers of those packages.

More information about the aur-general mailing list