Arch Linux

smcsw2000

Member

Registered: 2007-06-22

Posts: 130

File versus file-svn

What is the difference between packages in the repositories of any package and that package-svn? I realize that a svn is a subversion and that is rewritten for tailored uses. But why have two different ones in AUR?

sirius

Member

From: Norway

Registered: 2008-12-25

Posts: 68

Re: File versus file-svn

A "normal" package fetches a compressed archive of a given version of "project x", decompress, compile and pack it into a installable package. A "-svn" version of a package fetches the latest svn or development version, compiles it and pack it into a installable package.

--edit--

and the point: the svn version is probably more buggy or may even not compile, but the user may test new features and fixes before a new development or a stable version is released.

Last edited by sirius (2008-12-30 00:03:30)

tomk

Forum Fellow

From: Ireland

Registered: 2004-07-21

Posts: 9,839

Re: File versus file-svn

You will also see -cvs, -git, -hg, -bzr, and -darcs extensions on package names. The concept is the same, the difference is the scm (source code management) application in use upstream.

Trevorofmolino

Member

Registered: 2008-07-24

Posts: 37

Re: File versus file-svn

Thanks. So basically until I am ready to try more indepth programming and learn more i should stay away from svn, cvs ...etc until I learn more.

EnvoyRising

Member

Registered: 2008-08-08

Posts: 118

Re: File versus file-svn

No. It's more like if you don' mind waiting for feature x to come out during a package's stable release, stay away from svn, git, etc.

Assuming the build process finishes (makepkg, yaourt, tupac, or your run of the mill make && make install), consider the packages more bleeding edge (and most likely more unstable) than the testing repo