[aur-requests] [PRQ#12585] Merge Request for polysh
mr.felixoid at gmail.com
Mon Sep 3 14:37:10 UTC 2018
Thank you, Eli. That's an interesting example.
I've got the idea. Let's the package stay as is.
Have a nice time,
пн, 3 сент. 2018 г. в 14:07, Eli Schwartz <eschwartz at archlinux.org>:
> On 9/3/18 3:25 AM, Felixoid wrote:
> > Good day's time Eli and Yen,
> > I hope you are well.
> > First of all, Eli, thank you for the answer. You are right, and it's
> > difficult for me to call my own "deprecation way" somehow but "stupid".
> > I wasn't happy, of course, about it but didn't mention the proper way
> > like "Merge request" one month ago. I'm sorry for it and for that fact
> > that it was in AUR for almost a month.
> > Because of it, I've fixed the package already.
> > Nevertheless, Yen, polysh package contains not an only script by itself
> > but modules in /usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages/, see . Regarding
> > this, I couldn't say, that polysh doesn't provide modules. Moreover,
> > when two months ago python was upgraded from 3.6 to 3.7, the package was
> > broken without any hints. That's why I've thought that it's a good idea
> > to add the prefix. IMHO, it doesn't contradict with .
> Firefox breaks (frequently!) when "icu" is updated. Notwithstanding that
> it's a repository package and thusly gets rebuilt on time, does that
> mean that it's proper package name should be "icu-firefox" because it
> has a binary dependency on the icu package?
> Maybe it should even be renamed to
> Should pacman be renamed to curl-libarchive-pacman?
> Should bash be renamed to readline-bash?
> No, that would be silly.
> Eli Schwartz
> Bug Wrangler and Trusted User
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the aur-requests