[aur-general] for queueRAM -- about perForce software issues

[goodmenzy at gmail.com]

Thanks for your advices in detail!

On 2012-02-16 07:41:59, Alexander R鴇seth wrote:
> Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2012 07:41:59 +0100
> From: Alexander R鴇seth <rodseth at gmail.com>
> To: "Discussion about the Arch User Repository (AUR)"
>  <aur-general at archlinux.org>
> Subject: Re: [aur-general] for queueRAM -- about perForce software issues
> Reply-To: "Discussion about the Arch User Repository (AUR)"
>  <aur-general at archlinux.org>
> Message-ID: <CAG7ayys98bpHfo_LeS2Vrp5G=94ncqD4Ac+dLxeve2GT4C0PRg at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> List-Id: "Discussion about the Arch User Repository \(AUR\)"
>  <aur-general.archlinux.org>
> 
> Hi,
> 
> If the hash sum test fails, it's a nice check and reminder if anything
> changed since the PKGBUILD was last looked at. Unless Perforce
> releases new versions very often, it may be a good idea that the
> PKGBUILD keeps failing when the source changes, so that it gets
> reviewed again.
> 
> If there are new releases semi-daily/semi-weekly and you really trust
> upstream, using curl or wget to download the file in question in
> build() would work, but I'm not sure if it would qualify as the Arch
> Way.
> 
> Good luck with the PKGBUILD in any case.
> 
> -- 
> Cordially,
> 燗lexander R鴇seth
> 燗rch Linux Trusted User
> ?(xyproto on IRC, trontonic on AUR)