you are right @karol,
but i thought it is for security and i don't see the difference.
ezik
It's not for security, it's to keep the AUR from being a hosting site.
]]>but i thought it is for security and i don't see the difference.
ezik
]]>A post to the aur-general mailing list will follow.
As I stated before, it is most likely that users who want to install the packages I created won't fulfill the hardware requirements to build the binaries by themselves. As soon as the thunderbird extensions in question, that I currently made available from Fedora ARM binaries, are covered by the regular ArchLinuxArm repos, I will request their removal from AUR.
]]>AUR queries should be posted to the aur-general mailing list.
As indicated in the thread linked by Karol above, it is permitted to append unsupported architectures to the arch array of a PKGBUILD that builds on officially supported architectures. That does not necessarily mean that we will allow packages that only build on unsupported architectures. This should be discussed on the mailing list. I have a vague memory of this coming up before and I think the consensus was that such packages would not be supported, but that consensus may have changed. Personally, I do not see a problem with such packages right now and I expect official supported to be extended in the future, so I am in favor of allowing them.
Packages that install pre-compiled binaries should be distinguished from normal packages with a "-bin" suffix. Such packages are permitted as long as they do not violate applicable licenses.
what about
wiki wrote:(absolutely no binaries)
?
ezik
I'm not sure what part of the wiki exactly are you quoting, but I think you're talking about 'no uploading binaries to the AUR' rule. If the binaries are downloaded from some external server, it's just fine.
]]>(absolutely no binaries)
?
ezik
]]>the wiki for AUR packaging is all about compiling from source
Well of course, almost everything in Linux is compile-able from source, after all.
Anyway, thanks for the answers, I think I just proceed creating the PKGBUILD for my package...
Don't forget to mark the thread [solved].
]]>Of course I will take care about licensing issues.
I am also aware of some other packages that repack alien packages but I wasn't so sure about the actual policy, since the wiki for AUR packaging is all about compiling from source
Anyway, thanks for the answers, I think I just proceed creating the PKGBUILD for my package...
]]>I use ArchLinuxArm and want to create an AUR package that gets binaries from, lets say Fedora ARM, extracts them and modifies the config files in order to make it compatible with the Arch way of Linux. Of course, the PKGBUILD I am going to write will limit installation on the appropriate arcitecture, e.g. armv7h, then.
Is this generally allowed or will my package be deleted after submission to AUR?
Best,
RaumZeit
]]>