[aur-general] Should nvidia(-beta)-all replace all the other nvidia-* packages in the AUR?

Oon-Ee Ng ngoonee.talk at gmail.com
Thu Mar 31 20:04:28 EDT 2011

Thanks for your response Rémy,

On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 7:54 AM, Rémy Oudompheng
<remyoudompheng at gmail.com> wrote:
> My definition was not about interactivity but dynamic nature.
> nvidia-beta-all is dynamic in the sense that it *computes* local
> variables that influence the resulting package. A reproducible package
> does as much as it can to hardcode the parameters and options it uses
> so that each time it is compiled it must produce the same results
> (this is usually false, because sonames may change and installed
> package may influence configuration steps).
> In other words, I think PKGBUILDs that could be incorportaed in a
> binary repository as is should not be removed in favour of a PKGBUILD
> that cannot be used for a binary repository: nvidia-beta-all can't be
> used for a repository because it can produce totally different
> packages with the same name, version and pkgrel. It is however a
> convenient thing to have.

Fair enough.
> By the way, I think you should tweak your PKGBUILD so that it
> correctly sets its $depends array. I don't think nvidia packages
> really depend on their associated kernels (I mean you can remove the
> kernels without removing the modules) but it prevents it from being
> used as is by people who only have kernel26-lts, for example.
Change made, thanks. Original copied from nvidia-beta, I'll inform the
maintainer that that should be removed. Only seems obvious once
someone has pointed it out (to me) =)

More information about the aur-general mailing list