[aur-general] Rename `identicurse` and `identicurse-nogit`
i.caught.air at gmail.com
Mon Jan 23 19:21:57 EST 2012
For the information, his package ended up with the wrong name because the PKGBUILD contains this:
The name of the package must end with -git in order to be a git package. Then the pkgver is the version, or in our case, the current date its submited to AUR for a git package.
- When a change is done in Git, your users will get the new files.
- If you ever have to update the PKGBUILD file for any reason, update the pkgver variable with the new current date, then upload to AUR as a new package, it'll automatically replace the older one with your fixes.
- If you have to do it twice in the same day, increment pkgrel to, say, 2 or 3, etc. but keep the same date.
The best way to go, again in my opinion, ask for a removal of both packages in the AUR, then fix the two PKGBUILDs and their names, then re-upload online. That's what I'd do.
On Jan 23, 2012, at 6:50 PM, Psychedelic Squid <psquid at psquid.net> wrote:
> On 23/01/12 at 06:29pm, Alex Belanger wrote:
>> I'm not a Trusted User (they know much more stuff than I do about packages), but in my opinion the name choices were wrong in the first place.
>> You may want to go through the trouble of warning your users about the future name changes, then ask here to make it happen.
>> Of course it's annoying for the end-users but if its for the better... why not.
>> Most of us will quickly give a look in the AUR as soon as something break for an explanation. Just don't forget to write about it in the comments.
>> Btw, does the other maintainer knows?
>> On Jan 23, 2012, at 5:07 PM, Psychedelic Squid <psquid at psquid.net> wrote:
>> -- SNIP --
> Yes, the wrong name choices are why both myself and timttmy would prefer
> them to be changed (he made a previous attempt at some time around the
> 26th of Oct last year, but somehow the package just ended up with
> a different version number. I'm not 100% sure why).
> I was hoping there was some way to have AUR wrappers understand that the
> packages had renamed, but I had suspected that there wasn't anything of
> that nature. Ah well.
> Anyway, I'll get on with making sure people are reasonably aware of the
> name change, then post a follow-up here once it should be safe to do the
> Thanks for the help!
>  see the comments on <https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=42734>
More information about the aur-general