You are not logged in.
Pages: 1
Hi!
I think, it would be a nice improvement, if there was size-field in the AUR-package-sites (don't know, how to call it. The site with the pkgbuild and the information for a package in the AUR). Actually I'm not sure, what size is more important: The size of the compiled package/installed package or the size of data you have to download. But that's something I'm really missing, because actually you first see the size after executing "makepkg".
now with 80% more sax-appeal!
"I hacked the Phrak, and all I got was this lousy signature"
Offline
Post a feature request @ bugs.archlinux.org .
Offline
if i understand what u say size should be added to the PKGBUILD. at least the way things work now.
Hi!
Actually I'm not sure, what size is more important: The size of the compiled package/installed package or the size of data you have to download. But that's something I'm really missing, because actually you first see the size after executing "makepkg".
im not usre size is important in general
There shouldn't be any reason to learn more editor types than emacs or vi -- mg (1)
[You learn that sarcasm does not often work well in international forums. That is why we avoid it. -- ewaller (arch linux forum moderator)
Offline
ok, did it.
now with 80% more sax-appeal!
"I hacked the Phrak, and all I got was this lousy signature"
Offline
Pages: 1