[aur-general] Are AUR VCS packages that depend on AUR VCS packages from other projects a good idea and who should decide on that ?

Lone_Wolf lonewolf at xs4all.nl
Tue Apr 16 22:54:14 UTC 2019

On 16-04-2019 18:28, Bruno Pagani wrote:
> Can you show me the diff that you would have between a PKGBUILD
> compiling against llvm-svn and one compiling against llvm? I need this
> to assess what to do in this situation.
> Regards,
> Bruno

Diff against most recent upload

$ diff --unified --text PKGBUILD PKGBUILD.stable --color
--- PKGBUILD    2019-04-17 00:33:05.000000000 +0200
+++ PKGBUILD.stable     2019-04-17 00:38:03.029521485 +0200
@@ -15,11 +15,11 @@
-makedepends=('git' 'python-mako' 'llvm-git' 'clang-git' 'xorgproto'
+makedepends=('git' 'python-mako' 'llvm' 'clang'  'xorgproto'
                'libxml2' 'libx11'  'libvdpau' 'libva' 'elfutils' 
'libomxil-bellagio' 'libxrandr'
                'ocl-icd' 'vulkan-icd-loader' 'libgcrypt' 'wayland' 
'wayland-protocols' 'meson')
  depends=('libdrm' 'libxxf86vm' 'libxdamage' 'libxshmfence' 'libelf'
-         'libomxil-bellagio' 'llvm-libs-git' 'libunwind' 'libglvnd' 
'wayland' 'lm_sensors' 'libclc' 'glslang')
+         'libomxil-bellagio' 'llvm-libs' 'libunwind' 'libglvnd' 
'wayland' 'lm_sensors' 'libclc' 'glslang')
  optdepends=('opengl-man-pages: for the OpenGL API man pages')
  provides=('mesa' 'vulkan-intel' 'vulkan-radeon' 'libva-mesa-driver' 
'mesa-vdpau' 'vulkan-driver' 'opencl-mesa' 'opengl-driver' 'opencl-driver')
  conflicts=('mesa' 'opencl-mesa' 'vulkan-intel' 'vulkan-radeon' 
'libva-mesa-driver' 'mesa-vdpau')

On 16-04-2019 18:26, Eli Schwartz via aur-general wrote:
> On 4/16/19 9:19 AM, Lone_Wolf wrote:
> The AUR package maintainer is trusted to use his or her discretion when
> selecting which version of llvm to target. It's assumed that the AUR
> maintainer is competent enough to know the benefits and costs of
> choosing one or the other.
> If people have issues with the AUR maintainer's choices, they may
> provide suggestions or ask for explanations, but at the end of the day,
> the AUR maintainer can just say "I have X and Y reasons for doing it
> this way, and I don't believe doing otherwise would be serving the
> community".
> Since you seem to have a pretty good rationale for why users using
> mesa-git would *per default* wish to use llvm-svn, I see no reason to
> change anything.
> Anyone else who wants, is free to upload a new AUR package called e.g.
> mesa-half-git -- not sure what to call it exactly, but you make
> convincing arguments that it isn't the default expectation and isn't
> exactly what one would expect the natural mesa-git experience to be.
> It seems reasonable to leave things as they are, and perhaps prioritize
> adding comments to document what changes are needed. You could even add
> a variable at the top of the PKGBUILD, _USE_STABLE_LLVM= with a comment
> that setting the variable to non-empty will automatically make those
> changes.
Adding instructions to switch PKGBUILD to stable llvm/clang is a good idea.

Switching from mesa to mesa-git is easy, reverting is tricky and not 
everyone has the insight needed to revert from a package with 1 
package() function to a split package with multiple package() functions.

I need to add instructions/explanation for reverting from mesa-git / 
llvm trunk to mesa/llvm stable.


More information about the aur-general mailing list