[aur-general] TU Application - György Balló
xyne at archlinux.ca
Fri Mar 2 13:53:14 EST 2012
> Allan McRae wrote:
> > > Since when it is a good packaging quality to upload packages which
> > > can't be installed?
> > They can be installed. Or do you mean can not be installed by an AUR
> > helper? In which case you are still wrong due to the extra dependency line.
> I think this point should be stressed. Yaourt and other AUR helpers do not
> determine the validity of a PKGBUILD. If you can download the tarball from the
> AUR and build the package with makepkg, then the PKGBUILD is *valid* as far as
> the AUR is concerned.
> Having said that, I disagree that the criteria for a *good* PKGBUILD is only
> that it build. PKGBUILDs should try to conform to certain patterns and not
> exploit the fact that they are written in Bash (unless absolutely necessary,
> and even then only reluctantly). All metapackaging tools would have been much
> easier to write if PKGBUILDs were perfectly parsable without arbitrary code
> execution. The choice of Bash was myopic and lazy in my opinion, and something
> that should be reversed as far as possible, not glorified.
Hmmm, I should have finished reading all of the threads before replying. This
would have been more appropriate elsewhere. Sorry.
More information about the aur-general