Xmonad: Is there any other reason for two separate packages in AUR?

thayer · 2008-04-02 05:17:15

I just went to grab the latest PKGBUILDS for xmonad tonight and I see that we now have 2 fairly up-to-date package sets. Is there a particular reason why? Obviously, the xmonad-darcs is a darcs-based version suggesting that it's always more current than any fixed releases, but is that the only reason we have two maintainers and two packages? Just curious...

Edit: I changed the topic because there obviously is a sensible reason for two versions...I just hadn't taken the time to consider it.

Last edited by thayer (2008-04-03 04:18:47)

tomk · 2008-04-02 05:49:49

I won't venture any opinion on whether it's sensible or not, but it is something that happens a lot IME. Have a browse around the AUR and you'll come up with plenty of examples of foo and foo-{cvs,svn,bzr,darcs,git,etc} packages. You'll also find numerous SCM versions of packages from the official repos.

That's life in the AUR.

thayer · 2008-04-02 05:52:30

Yeah, I suppose that's true. It just seems like such a niche application to begin with, the idea of two versions running side by each seems a bit overkill--I thought it might be for political reasons or something. Either way, the darcs version still works like a charm.

Last edited by thayer (2008-04-02 05:53:36)

vogt · 2008-04-03 03:14:52

xmonad-core and xmonad-contrib libraries could be merged into one package, but that would require some hacking, since ghc needs the xmonad-core libraries available when building contrib.

To work around that and make one package of core+contrib that can be built like any normal pkgbuild will take some complexity (tricking ghc to look at the xmonad-core in $startdir/pkg/usr/lib/ghc...., instead of a default path.)

If there were a simpler solution, we would have a core package, and a core+contrib package (which would prevent the breakages when only one library is updated)

thayer · 2008-04-03 04:14:44

vogt wrote:

xmonad-core and xmonad-contrib libraries could be merged into one package, but that would require some hacking...

I was just referring to the two separate xmonad installations (xmonad and xmonad-darcs), but I think the answer is obvious and I was just tired when I typed the question. The darcs version is the most recent development snapshot, while the xmonad 0.7 is the 'stable' release.

Arch Linux

#1 2008-04-02 05:17:15

Xmonad: Is there any other reason for two separate packages in AUR?

#2 2008-04-02 05:49:49

Re: Xmonad: Is there any other reason for two separate packages in AUR?

#3 2008-04-02 05:52:30

Re: Xmonad: Is there any other reason for two separate packages in AUR?

#4 2008-04-03 03:14:52

Re: Xmonad: Is there any other reason for two separate packages in AUR?

#5 2008-04-03 04:14:44

Re: Xmonad: Is there any other reason for two separate packages in AUR?

Board footer