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

Fernando Gilberto Pereira da Silva firefgx at gmail.com
Thu Sep 25 02:30:35 UTC 2014

2014-09-24 12:50 GMT+08:00, Ralf Mardorf <info.mardorf at rocketmail.com>:
> 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.

I think it makes sense in some case.

Firstly, if I wish to create a personal repository manually, I don't
need to copy an "any"-architecture package to both folders("i686" and
"x86_64"), or link to both folders and then execute repo-add twice in
both folders.

What's more, some other unofficial architecture like "archlinuxarm" or
"archlinuxppc" could also use those "any"-architecture package by just
adding the "any" folder.(Though it may make a mess of it)

In a word, keep only two folders("i686" and "x86_64") for the official
repository and allow users to create their personal repositories with
three folders("i686", "x86_64" and "any) would be a compromise

More information about the aur-general mailing list