[aur-general] Promoting use of .AURINFO

Peter Littmann peter.littmann at gmx.de
Fri Jan 17 07:56:44 EST 2014

Am 17.01.2014 11:53, schrieb Lukas Fleischer:
> On Fri, 17 Jan 2014 at 03:11:54, Dave Reisner wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 06:31:40PM -0500, Dave Reisner wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 08:52:46PM +0100, Lukas Fleischer wrote:
>>>> 3) duplicate a lot of stuff in the pkgname section, even if it's
>>>>     identical to what is listed in the pkgbase section.
>>> That shouldn't be the case. What package were you looking at that shows
>>> this in the .AURINFO?  The goal is that pkgbase section provides the
>>> bulk of the metadata -- the individual pkgname sections are only
>>> overrides and supplements. The GetMergedPackage def in the python parser
>>> illustrates how the base and "overlay" create each output package.
>> Nevermind this -- I found cases where this happens. Fixed locally, just
>> need to write some regression tests.
> Great! I just submitted some patches to the AUR to add support for the
> new format and add a deprecation warning for packages not containing any
> meta data [1].
> [1] https://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-dev/2014-January/002616.html
Could you please send more infos about mkaurball, the new format and if 
this page in the wiki is still true:

What should be changed?
BTW: How to handle split packages?

More information about the aur-general mailing list