[aur-general] Promoting use of .AURINFO

Lukas Fleischer archlinux at cryptocrack.de
Sun Jan 12 10:11:14 EST 2014

On Sun, 12 Jan 2014 at 15:51:48, Anton Larionov wrote:
> Hello,
> I was under the impression that .AURINFO was introduced to override some
> fields in PKGBUILD when they are written in format which can't be properly
> displayed by AUR (or maybe I've missed something). But why do you want to
> force it's usage for all packages? In most cases AURINFO will just 
> duplicate same fields from PKGBUILD.

The long-term plan is to use it for all AUR packages, improve the format
and finally make it an official feature of makepkg(8) (the file will
probably be called .SRCINFO then but we're far from there). See my other
reply to Sebastien for some reasons on why it should be used.

> Also I have some questions about it's format:
> 1) If package has different dependencies for 86_64 and 686, what should I
>    put in depend array?

Good question. This cannot be answered properly, though, since
dependencies actually are a property of the binary package and not a
property of the source package. Maybe we should loosen the format for
dependencies of source packages and allow optdep-like comments?
Something like:

    depends = foo
    depends = bar
    depends = foobar: x86_64 only

Just an idea. Comments welcome.

> 2) Which 'pkgname' will be unique - from PKGBUILD or AURINFO? E.g if I
>    upload package with name 'foo' and overriden name 'bar' will someone
>    be able to upload new package with name 'foo'? Or 'bar'?

Only the information from .AURINFO will be used. You can already trick
the AUR into reading a completely different name from the PKGBUILD than
it actually produces (and that problem is unavoidable), so that isn't a
(new) issue.

> --
> Regards,
> Anton Larionov

More information about the aur-general mailing list