[aur-general] AUR Best Practice for New Package Upload

David Phillips dbphillipsnz at gmail.com
Wed Sep 24 07:22:50 UTC 2014

>A repository for "any" doesn't make sense.

It would mean that there's not the potential for duplication between
the various architectures' repos. I *am* assuming they'd use symlinks
for the 'any' packages on the mirrors?

On 24/09/2014, Giovanni Santini <giovannisantini93 at yahoo.it> wrote:
> Also, it can be used for packages which uses python or similar; python has
> to be 32bit or 64bit, apps written in python has not.
> In general, packages with an interpreter or a VM needs no architecture
> specific package, as its dependency is the interpeter/VM, which is arch
> dependant.
>> Il 24/set/2014 06:50 Ralf Mardorf <info.mardorf at rocketmail.com> ha
>> scritto:
>> >
>> > On Wed, 2014-09-24 at 09:28 +0800, Fernando Gilberto Pereira da Silva
>> > wrote:
>> > > Since 'any' is the architecture of the package, why isn't there a
>> > > folder called 'any' in the repo? I can see only 'i686' and 'x86_64' in
>> > >
>> > > repo 'core', 'extra' and 'community', and all of the
>> > > 'any'-architecture packages are put into both 'i686' and 'x86_64'
>> > > folders.
>> >
>> > People might use 32-bit architecture or 64-bit architecture, there isn't
>> >
>> > an "any" architecture. The "any" only refers to the content of a
>> > package. The content isn't compiled to work on 32-bit or 64-bit
>> > architecture, e.g. a dash script, so it can be used on both
>> > architectures, ergo a package that can be used for "any" architecture,
>> > needs to be put to the 32-bit and to the 64-bit architecture repository.
>> >
>> > A repository for "any" doesn't make sense.

David Phillips
GPG Key 0x7BF3D17D0884BF5B
Fingerprint 2426 235A 7831 AA2F 56AF  4BC0 7BF3 D17D 0884 BF5B

More information about the aur-general mailing list