[aur-general] Removal request: virtualbox-sun
nimetonmaili at gmail.com
Mon Mar 26 12:30:33 EDT 2012
On 26.3.2012 19:06, rafael ff1 wrote:
> 2012/3/26 Det<nimetonmaili at gmail.com>:
>> I guess this is a good summary of all the talk in virtualbox-sun's comment
>> The reality here is that virtualbox-bin has evolved into something _at
>> least_ as good as virtualbox-sun. While it's true that -sun is the original
>> one it's also the one with the incorrect naming, a bit slower updates (by a
>> day or so) and less votes (229 vs -bin's 3430). Because we can't justify
>> keeping duplicated work around just to make everybody happy, one of them has
>> to go.
>> Even if -sun was to stay here the "better" stuff in -bin would have to be
>> implemented there first before the removal and the renaming. When put
>> together with the comment/vote merge it's starting to sound a bit pointless
>> (taken how we can just remove that one).
>> I know what I'd do but it's not my decision: it's yours.
>>  virtualbox-sun = https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=31996
>>  virtualbox-bin = https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=51727
> It is interesting how both provide the same version of the same
> softwaer, but have totally different depedency listed. For example,
> "kernel26-headers" for virtualbox-sun.
Yeah. -sun is a bit outdated there too.
More information about the aur-general