things that make you go "grrrrr" offshoot: aur out-of-date flagging

clfarron4 · 2014-12-08 22:06:43

People flagging AUR packages out-of-date when:

1) they are not actually out-of-date;
2) the dependencies of the AUR packages are version-paired with those maintained by other people. Yes, thanks for the reminder that a package I maintain is out-of-date (even though I already knew), but if I update it now, someone will complain about versions not matching (for which I will get more stick);

Last edited by clfarron4 (2014-12-08 22:09:56)

WorMzy · 2014-12-08 22:13:03

What packages are you maintaining where versioning dependencies makes sense? Genuinely curious, versioning dependencies seems likes a lot of extra work for no actual benefit to me.

clfarron4 · 2014-12-08 22:37:31

WorMzy wrote:

What packages are you maintaining where versioning dependencies makes sense? Genuinely curious, versioning dependencies seems likes a lot of extra work for no actual benefit to me.

It would be the nvidia packages I maintain, namely nvidia-lts-ck and nvidia-340xx-lts-ck, where people do this to me. It comes from the dependency on the corresponding versions of the -utils packages.

WorMzy · 2014-12-08 23:03:34

Ahh, I should've realized it'd be out-of-tree kernel modules.

I don't envy your position there, aiming at two moving targets.

Awebb · 2014-12-09 10:01:54

clfarron4 wrote:

People flagging AUR packages out-of-date when:
1) they are not actually out-of-date;
2) the dependencies of the AUR packages are version-paired with those maintained by other people. Yes, thanks for the reminder that a package I maintain is out-of-date (even though I already knew), but if I update it now, someone will complain about versions not matching (for which I will get more stick);

But the packages are out of date now and then. Most of the users don't know about the dependencies and it's impossible to teach them. What's the problem with a package being flagged out of date, if there is a newer stable release? If there is no update for a reason, fine, but it's out of date, no matter how you look at it.

ugjka · 2014-12-09 10:10:32

It's good that outdated packages are flagged. If the maintainer isn't updating the package for some reason, users can look for an updated version and update the pkgbuild themselve.

clfarron4 · 2014-12-09 13:23:05

Awebb wrote:

clfarron4 wrote:
People flagging AUR packages out-of-date when:
1) they are not actually out-of-date;
2) the dependencies of the AUR packages are version-paired with those maintained by other people. Yes, thanks for the reminder that a package I maintain is out-of-date (even though I already knew), but if I update it now, someone will complain about versions not matching (for which I will get more stick);
But the packages are out of date now and then. Most of the users don't know about the dependencies and it's impossible to teach them. What's the problem with a package being flagged out of date, if there is a newer stable release? If there is no update for a reason, fine, but it's out of date, no matter how you look at it.

If I update my nvidia packages right now (or last night for that matter), then more people are likely to shout "What the hell are you doing? You just broke my upgrades because nvidia-utils/nvidia-340xx-utils in [extra] haven't been updated yet!". So, I'd rather leave it until those two packages are updated first.

ugjka wrote:

It's good that outdated packages are flagged. If the maintainer isn't updating the package for some reason, users can look for an updated version and update the pkgbuild themselve.

If it's obviously out-of-date and no action has been taken for a long time without good reason, then that's fair enough. I've no quibbles with this one.

Last edited by clfarron4 (2014-12-09 13:29:11)

ANOKNUSA · 2014-12-09 13:46:40

clfarron4 wrote:

If I update my nvidia packages right now (or last night for that matter), then more people are likely to shout "What the hell are you doing? You just broke my upgrades because nvidia-utils/nvidia-340xx-utils in [extra] haven't been updated yet!". So, I'd rather leave it until those two packages are updated first.

Just update the package. This is the AUR; Arch is a rolling-release distribution. The latest version should be made available when it's released, and packages in the AUR don't come with a guarantee or seal of approval. If someone decides to jump the gun and update without thinking first (or if someone uses yaourt et. al. to mindlessly automate it) then it's on them if their system breaks. Me, I get a notification from cower that new versions of packages from the AUR are available, and then I go read the web pages to see if the maintainer or a user has left a comment about anything. I update if I feel it's safe.

I might be willing to bet more people have flowed through the Arch community who didn't get the idea behind and risks of the AUR than people who do. Grrr.

Awebb · 2014-12-09 22:31:04

clfarron4 wrote:

Awebb wrote:
But the packages are out of date now and then. Most of the users don't know about the dependencies and it's impossible to teach them. What's the problem with a package being flagged out of date, if there is a newer stable release? If there is no update for a reason, fine, but it's out of date, no matter how you look at it.
If I update my nvidia packages right now (or last night for that matter), then more people are likely to shout "What the hell are you doing? You just broke my upgrades because nvidia-utils/nvidia-340xx-utils in [extra] haven't been updated yet!". So, I'd rather leave it until those two packages are updated first.

Yes, I'm with you so far. What I don' understand is the problem about a package being flagged out of date for a while. If there is a more recent version, the flag is correct. Leave a comment in this case "update pending until X has caught up". Then everybody knows, that the package is not the most recent version and that the core repos are holding you up.

Xyne · 2014-12-09 22:43:11

mod note
I have split this discussion from the little things that make you go "grrrrrr" thread. I have placed it in AUR discussion for now but it may end up in TGN.

erkexzcx · 2014-12-09 23:50:00

AUR page seriously needs some changes. People who flag it out of date SHOULD write a little comment why, post some output etc!

clfarron4 · 2014-12-10 00:43:07

Awebb wrote:

What I don' understand is the problem about a package being flagged out of date for a while. If there is a more recent version, the flag is correct. Leave a comment in this case "update pending until X has caught up". Then everybody knows, that the package is not the most recent version and that the core repos are holding you up.

With the AUR as it is, this is probably the best way to manage it.

erkexzcx wrote:

AUR page seriously needs some changes. People who flag it out of date SHOULD write a little comment why, post some output etc!

Ideally, this would happen (and it indeed it does with my freetype2-ubuntu packages).

About leaving comments, feedback etc. when flagging packages out-of-date, I opened this feature request on the AUR bugtracker, to implement a comment form like the one you get for flagging official packages out-of-date. This happened after someone flagged damn near every AUR kernel package that was on the 3.17 branch out-of-date when 3.17.4 was released (despite some of our upstreams still being on 3.17.3). The thing is that AUR has a comment system and people may choose not to leave a comment if a comment form is mandatory, so we're back to where we were.

alex.theoto · 2014-12-11 19:53:21

Also, I'm wonder when a package is flagged 'out-of-date' and it is not. Like there is no new version for years and the current version is the same from the source. Is there an option to unflag it?

clfarron4 · 2014-12-11 22:21:33

alex.theoto wrote:

Also, I'm wonder when a package is flagged 'out-of-date' and it is not. Like there is no new version for years and the current version is the same from the source. Is there an option to unflag it?

Yes, there is a link for the maintainer of the package to unflag the package on the page, in the maintenance area of the page. If you're not the maintainer, and you want it unflagged, contact the maintainer directly and wait for them to unflag it.

Arch Linux

#1 2014-12-08 22:06:43

things that make you go "grrrrr" offshoot: aur out-of-date flagging

#2 2014-12-08 22:13:03

Re: things that make you go "grrrrr" offshoot: aur out-of-date flagging

#3 2014-12-08 22:37:31

Re: things that make you go "grrrrr" offshoot: aur out-of-date flagging

#4 2014-12-08 23:03:34

Re: things that make you go "grrrrr" offshoot: aur out-of-date flagging

#5 2014-12-09 10:01:54

Re: things that make you go "grrrrr" offshoot: aur out-of-date flagging

#6 2014-12-09 10:10:32

Re: things that make you go "grrrrr" offshoot: aur out-of-date flagging

#7 2014-12-09 13:23:05

Re: things that make you go "grrrrr" offshoot: aur out-of-date flagging

#8 2014-12-09 13:46:40

Re: things that make you go "grrrrr" offshoot: aur out-of-date flagging

#9 2014-12-09 22:31:04

Re: things that make you go "grrrrr" offshoot: aur out-of-date flagging

#10 2014-12-09 22:43:11

Re: things that make you go "grrrrr" offshoot: aur out-of-date flagging

#11 2014-12-09 23:50:00

Re: things that make you go "grrrrr" offshoot: aur out-of-date flagging

#12 2014-12-10 00:43:07

Re: things that make you go "grrrrr" offshoot: aur out-of-date flagging

#13 2014-12-11 19:53:21

Re: things that make you go "grrrrr" offshoot: aur out-of-date flagging

#14 2014-12-11 22:21:33

Re: things that make you go "grrrrr" offshoot: aur out-of-date flagging

Board footer