[aur-general] Adding AUR packages to [community] packages' provides
ngoonee at gmail.com
Fri Feb 25 18:56:19 EST 2011
On Fri, 2011-02-25 at 14:42 -0700, Thomas S Hatch wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 2:40 PM, Peter Lewis <plewis at aur.archlinux.org>wrote:
> > On Friday 25 February 2011 11:12:15 Lukas Fleischer wrote:
> > > Well, I'm addressing current blacklisting issues with the AUR . I
> > > noticed that some of the packages in the official repos have AUR
> > > packages as provides, some of them (well, at least one of them, didn't
> > > search for more) were even added due to FRs . Donnu if this applies
> > > to [core] and [extra] as well.
> > >
> > > Is that regular practice? Imho, we shouldn't do that. The AUR is
> > > something to be considered separately. If we start to care about
> > > provides/conflicts with AUR packages, we'll need to add all
> > > "-devel"/"-svn"/"-git"/"-beta" packages in the AUR to the official
> > > packages conflicts and provides as well. And we'll need to start
> > > searching for alternative repos to ensure there's no conflict with our
> > > official packages.
> > >
> > > Seriously, we should be consistent here.
> > Can't remember where I read this being discussed, but I'm pretty sure that
> > no
> > package in [core], [extra] or [community] should reference anything in the
> > AUR.
> > Pete.
> Right, if there is a package that is depending on an AUR package from a
> supported repo than it is a bug and can be reported.
> -Thomas S Hatch
As I think has been previously mentioned, this probably happens with
cleanups when packages are dropped? Because I don't think 'provides'
gets checked, of course 'depends' and 'requires' does.
More information about the aur-general