[aur-general] Community Cleanup 2011.
hmunstege at yahoo.com
Mon Jan 10 14:26:00 EST 2011
don't know what I have started......
I was just trying to report on a few issues I encountered while doing some tests
with Grass (building 6.4 through ABS and Grass-svn through AUR).
Now I am involved in a whole discussion on orphans, deadlines, responsabilities,
Well just get back on the issue:
* I managed to build grass 6.4.0-6 with your suggestion with devtools and
'extra-x86_64'. It gives me a packeage. Still don't understand why it does not
fonction with the standards ABS-way;
* It's clear why grass-svn in AUR is not working since it is not yet adjusted
to the python 2.x and python 3.1 environment. I tried to adjust the PKGBUILD for
grass-svn with the specific python lines from the PKGBUILD for grass 6.4 that
worked (see above). I have attached this PKGBUILD to this message. Trying this
in the clean chroot environment gives me an error in line 36 (does
not recognize the svn command in the chroot env.)
Well that's it. Wanted to post this info on the grass-svn aur page. But
apperantly I don't have an account to post on aur pages. Sorry if I have started
any annoying business, just wanted to be helpful with my experiences and trying
to get stable GIS application under this wonderful distro
Bamako, Rep. du Mali
Tel: +223 20226397
Port: +223 78370695
From: Thomas Dziedzic <gostrc at gmail.com>
To: Discussion about the Arch User Repository (AUR) <aur-general at archlinux.org>
Sent: Mon, January 10, 2011 4:11:32 PM
Subject: Re: [aur-general] Community Cleanup 2011.
On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 9:47 AM, Sergej Pupykin <ml at sergej.pp.ru> wrote:
> At Mon, 10 Jan 2011 08:35:30 -0600,
> Thomas Dziedzic <gostrc at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I would like to propose moving all of the orphans in [community] to
>> the aur by this Friday if no one has adopted them by then.
>> If one of your packages needs an orphan as a dependency, you must adopt it.
>> Orphans really deserve a maintainer and I would be more comfortable
>> with the package having a maintainer in the aur then being an orphan
>> in [community].
>> Community orphans:
>> Thanks and let the discussion begin!
> There are no out-of-date orphans and there are no unassigned
> bugs in community section. Is there any reason of this cleanup?
This is more of a assigning responsibility to a package sort of thing,
as I said, I would rather have it be in aur and have a maintainer then
be in community and be an orphan.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 3121 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the aur-general