[aur-general] Which aur uploader is better, aurploader or burp?

郑文辉(Techlive Zheng) techlivezheng at gmail.com
Fri Feb 17 09:35:48 EST 2012

2012/2/17 SanskritFritz <sanskritfritz at gmail.com>:
> 2012/2/17 Cédric Girard <girard.cedric at gmail.com>:
>> 2012/2/17 Alireza Savand <alireza.savand at gmail.com>
>>> For downloading yes of course it's nice to have one like yaourt, but for
>>> uploading it's little bit useless.
>> No, it's really useful when you are updating your PKGBUILD on an headless
>> server.
> It *is* very useful. I maintain numerous aur packages, and using burp
> is very convenient. I just do a
> #!/usr/bin/fish
> makepkg --source
> burp (ls --sort=time *src.tar.gz | head -1)
> Previously I used aurploader (anything associated with Xyne is
> appealing since the times of bauerbill), but it forgot the
bauerbill is fantastic,espacially its CPAN support,save lots of time.
> user/password too quickly, so I tried burp, which fits my needs better\
You mean that aurploader can not keep username and passname in config file?
> in this regard. Both are great programs.

More information about the aur-general mailing list