Jude DaShiell | 5 May 15:16 2016
Picon

out of date packages?

What are proper criteria for flagging a package out of date?  My reason 
for asking has to do with:
http://www.floodgap.com/software/ttytter/

--

Arch Website Notification | 5 May 10:07 2016

Signoff report for [community-testing]

=== Signoff report for [community-testing] ===
https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/

There are currently:
* 9 new packages in last 24 hours
* 0 known bad packages
* 0 packages not accepting signoffs
* 0 fully signed off packages
* 43 packages missing signoffs
* 0 packages older than 14 days

(Note: the word 'package' as used here refers to packages as grouped by
pkgbase, architecture, and repository; e.g., one PKGBUILD produces one
package per architecture, even if it is a split package.)

== New packages in [community-testing] in last 24 hours (9 total) ==

* gcc-docs-6.1.0-1 (any)
* acpi_call-lts-1.1.0-31 (i686)
* bbswitch-lts-0.8-20 (i686)
* r8168-lts-8.041.00-7 (i686)
* tp_smapi-lts-0.41-51 (i686)
* acpi_call-lts-1.1.0-31 (x86_64)
* bbswitch-lts-0.8-20 (x86_64)
* r8168-lts-8.041.00-7 (x86_64)
* tp_smapi-lts-0.41-51 (x86_64)

== Incomplete signoffs for [community] (43 total) ==

* gcc-docs-6.1.0-1 (any)
(Continue reading)

WorMzy Tykashi | 4 May 21:20 2016
Picon

Should co-maintainers get OOD notifications?

Hey,

One of the packages I co-maintain on the AUR was flagged as out of
date today, but I didn't get a notification. Could someone confirm
whether this is normal/expected behaviour, or should I open a bug
report about it?

Cheers,

WorMzy

Lukas Fleischer | 4 May 13:14 2016

Duplicates in the AUR/[community]/[extra]

I did not run aurdupes for a while and in the meantime, the list of
packages being both in the AUR and in the official repositories grew
quite large (almost 100 packages!):

    bandit
    * bandit [community]
    * bandit http://aur.archlinux.org/packages/bandit/
    chinese-calendar
    * chinese-calendar [community]
    * chinese-calendar http://aur.archlinux.org/packages/chinese-calendar/
    docbook-dsssl
    * docbook-dsssl [extra]
    * docbook-dsssl http://aur.archlinux.org/packages/docbook-dsssl/
    docbook-sgml31
    * docbook-sgml31 [extra]
    * docbook-sgml31 http://aur.archlinux.org/packages/docbook-sgml31/
    docbook-utils
    * docbook-utils [extra]
    * docbook-utils http://aur.archlinux.org/packages/docbook-utils/
    docker-machine
    * docker-machine [community]
    * docker-machine http://aur.archlinux.org/packages/docker-machine/
    gnome-todo
    * gnome-todo [extra]
    * gnome-todo http://aur.archlinux.org/packages/gnome-todo/
    graphene
    * graphene [extra]
    * graphene http://aur.archlinux.org/packages/graphene/
    gspell
    * gspell [extra]
(Continue reading)

Arch Website Notification | 4 May 10:07 2016

Signoff report for [community-testing]

=== Signoff report for [community-testing] ===
https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/

There are currently:
* 18 new packages in last 24 hours
* 0 known bad packages
* 0 packages not accepting signoffs
* 0 fully signed off packages
* 34 packages missing signoffs
* 0 packages older than 14 days

(Note: the word 'package' as used here refers to packages as grouped by
pkgbase, architecture, and repository; e.g., one PKGBUILD produces one
package per architecture, even if it is a split package.)

== New packages in [community-testing] in last 24 hours (18 total) ==

* python-zope-testrunner-4.5.0-2 (any)
* deepin-api-3.0.6-2 (i686)
* deepin-daemon-3.0.11-5 (i686)
* deepin-dbus-generator-0.6.4-4 (i686)
* deepin-file-manager-0.1.11-5 (i686)
* deepin-gir-generator-0.9.2-2 (i686)
* gost-2.0rc3-1 (i686)
* mongodb-tools-3.2.5-1 (i686)
* startdde-3.0.3-5 (i686)
* deepin-api-3.0.6-2 (x86_64)
* deepin-daemon-3.0.11-5 (x86_64)
* deepin-dbus-generator-0.6.4-4 (x86_64)
* deepin-file-manager-0.1.11-5 (x86_64)
(Continue reading)

Arch Website Notification | 3 May 10:07 2016

Signoff report for [community-testing]

=== Signoff report for [community-testing] ===
https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/

There are currently:
* 2 new packages in last 24 hours
* 0 known bad packages
* 0 packages not accepting signoffs
* 0 fully signed off packages
* 18 packages missing signoffs
* 0 packages older than 14 days

(Note: the word 'package' as used here refers to packages as grouped by
pkgbase, architecture, and repository; e.g., one PKGBUILD produces one
package per architecture, even if it is a split package.)

== New packages in [community-testing] in last 24 hours (2 total) ==

* rofi-1.0.1-1 (i686)
* rofi-1.0.1-1 (x86_64)

== Incomplete signoffs for [community] (18 total) ==

* acpi_call-1.1.0-45 (i686)
    0/1 signoffs
* bbswitch-0.8-47 (i686)
    0/1 signoffs
* r8168-8.041.00-10 (i686)
    0/1 signoffs
* rofi-1.0.1-1 (i686)
    0/1 signoffs
(Continue reading)

Eric Engestrom | 2 May 18:14 2016
Picon
Gravatar

AUR hook: "missing source files"

Hi all,

I wrote a package for the Coverity [1] scan build tool, but they require
manual download of their tarball, hidden behind a login [2]. Because
of that, my `source` array contains a filename with no URL, as you're
meant to download it manually and build the package afterwards.

When trying to upload my package to the AUR, its hook rejects it,
citing "missing source file":

  remote: error: The following error occurred when parsing commit
  remote: error: f468427b563a71e81656a849b1145166be3449ec:
  remote: error: missing source file: cov-analysis-linux32-7.7.0.4.tar.gz
  remote: error: hook declined to update refs/heads/master
  To aur@...:cov-analysis
   ! [remote rejected] master -> master (hook declined)
  error: failed to push some refs to 'aur@...:cov-analysis'

I can bypass that check by adding an empty file that will fail checksum
check when the user tries to use it, but I'd prefer no file to be there,
so it's clear to the user that they need to download the file using the
provided URL.

I've pushed it on my GitHub [3] in the mean time, so you can have a look
and tell me if I'm doing something dumb :]

Cheers,
  Eric

[1]: https://scan.coverity.com/
(Continue reading)

Arch Website Notification | 2 May 10:07 2016

Signoff report for [community-testing]

=== Signoff report for [community-testing] ===
https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/

There are currently:
* 0 new packages in last 24 hours
* 0 known bad packages
* 0 packages not accepting signoffs
* 0 fully signed off packages
* 26 packages missing signoffs
* 0 packages older than 14 days

(Note: the word 'package' as used here refers to packages as grouped by
pkgbase, architecture, and repository; e.g., one PKGBUILD produces one
package per architecture, even if it is a split package.)

== Incomplete signoffs for [community] (26 total) ==

* acpi_call-1.1.0-45 (i686)
    0/1 signoffs
* bbswitch-0.8-47 (i686)
    0/1 signoffs
* gdal-2.0.2-5 (i686)
    0/1 signoffs
* gputils-1.4.2-1 (i686)
    0/1 signoffs
* grace-5.1.25-2 (i686)
    0/1 signoffs
* libmatio-1.5.6-2 (i686)
    0/1 signoffs
* python-pytables-3.2.2-5 (i686)
(Continue reading)

Arch Website Notification | 1 May 10:07 2016

Signoff report for [community-testing]

=== Signoff report for [community-testing] ===
https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/

There are currently:
* 2 new packages in last 24 hours
* 0 known bad packages
* 0 packages not accepting signoffs
* 0 fully signed off packages
* 26 packages missing signoffs
* 0 packages older than 14 days

(Note: the word 'package' as used here refers to packages as grouped by
pkgbase, architecture, and repository; e.g., one PKGBUILD produces one
package per architecture, even if it is a split package.)

== New packages in [community-testing] in last 24 hours (2 total) ==

* virtualbox-modules-arch-5.0.20-2 (i686)
* virtualbox-modules-arch-5.0.20-2 (x86_64)

== Incomplete signoffs for [community] (26 total) ==

* acpi_call-1.1.0-45 (i686)
    0/1 signoffs
* bbswitch-0.8-47 (i686)
    0/1 signoffs
* gdal-2.0.2-5 (i686)
    0/1 signoffs
* gputils-1.4.2-1 (i686)
    0/1 signoffs
(Continue reading)

Arch Website Notification | 30 Apr 10:07 2016

Signoff report for [community-testing]

=== Signoff report for [community-testing] ===
https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/

There are currently:
* 2 new packages in last 24 hours
* 0 known bad packages
* 0 packages not accepting signoffs
* 0 fully signed off packages
* 34 packages missing signoffs
* 3 packages older than 14 days

(Note: the word 'package' as used here refers to packages as grouped by
pkgbase, architecture, and repository; e.g., one PKGBUILD produces one
package per architecture, even if it is a split package.)

== New packages in [community-testing] in last 24 hours (2 total) ==

* linux-grsec-4.5.2.201604290633-1 (i686)
* linux-grsec-4.5.2.201604290633-1 (x86_64)

== Incomplete signoffs for [community] (34 total) ==

* acpi_call-1.1.0-45 (i686)
    0/1 signoffs
* bbswitch-0.8-47 (i686)
    0/1 signoffs
* gdal-2.0.2-5 (i686)
    0/1 signoffs
* gputils-1.4.2-1 (i686)
    0/1 signoffs
(Continue reading)

Thomas Andrejak | 28 Apr 13:58 2016
Picon

New package : libpreludedb

Hello

I'm the technical manager of Prelude. It is made by
* libprelude
* libpreludedb
* prelude-manaer
* prelude-lml
* prelude-lml-rules
* prelude-correlator
* prewikka

libprelude is already packaged in AUR :
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/libprelude/ but not the other modules.

I made this PKGBUILD for libpreludedb, based on libprelude PKGBUILD.

Can anyone tell me if it is good or not for submit it to AUR ?

Thanks

Regards

ToToL


Gmane