[aur-general] Deletion request

Seblu seblu at seblu.net
Sat Jul 9 17:04:27 EDT 2011

On Sat, Jul 9, 2011 at 8:47 PM, Baptiste <zerstorer at free.fr> wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 09, 2011 at 08:15:06PM +0200, Seblu wrote:
>> On Sat, Jul 9, 2011 at 6:59 PM, Bartek Piotrowski <barthalion at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > 2011/7/9 Seblu <seblu at seblu.net>:
>> >> Beginning of the sentence is in english?
>> >
>> > Ex Falso[1] in AUR.
>> >
>> > [1] http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=19030
>> >
>> I wanted to adopt ntpdate to update it, but i'm believe package which
>> have strict equivalent in official repo should not stay in AUR.
>> Maybe a TU can englighten me? This package should be removed or updated?
> As far as I can tell, it doesn't look to be the exact same package as
> the one in [extra].
> The [extra] package includes the ntp daemon, while this one only
> bundles the ntpdate program.
This doesn't give more features. Arch doesn't start (like some others
distro) daemons automatically after install, so there is only size of
package difference.

> Yet, the overhead is not huge (the 'ntp' package takes 1.59 MB while
> 'ntpdate' from AUR takes 0.18 MB), and imho, it isn't worth the time
> compiling the AUR package.
To install it, we need to download package tarball + ntp tarball (1,2K
+ 4,2 M).

> The best solution might be to keep ntpdate-dev and delete ntpdate from
> the AUR.
I agree.

Sébastien Luttringer

More information about the aur-general mailing list