Force orphan out-of-date-package

manuelschneid3r · 2015-04-24 14:08:04

Can some moderator please orphan this package? Seems like the maintainer abandoned it.

A suggestion for improvement would be to allow votes to orphan abandoned packages.

Last edited by manuelschneid3r (2015-04-24 14:09:50)

Scimmia · 2015-04-24 14:11:01

manuelschneid3r wrote:

Can some moderator please orphan this package? Seems like the maintainer abandoned it.
A suggestion for improvement would be to allow votes to orphan abandoned packages.

Click the "File Request" link on the right side of the page.

manuelschneid3r · 2015-04-24 14:22:57

Oh thank you I did not notice this.

Okay than may I suggest to implement a archlinux side wide single sign on authentication system ?

Alad · 2015-04-24 14:30:37

Did you write the maintainer an email? (Yes, comments are sent to the AUR mail address, but addressing people directly could help)

Last edited by Alad (2015-04-24 14:33:01)

karol · 2015-04-24 14:34:08

manuelschneid3r wrote:

Okay than may I suggest to implement a archlinux side wide single sign on authentication system ?

Please search before posing ;P
https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/43293

manuelschneid3r · 2015-04-24 15:32:47

@Alad: I did.

@karol: For sure, sorry. However it was not meant that seriously at all. I did not expect anybody to react on it in this thread. I just mentioned it because it is somehow the reason why I dont know the "File Request" feature. In fact I am registered to the AUR, but hardly ever logged in. So I didnt even notice those functions.

Last edited by manuelschneid3r (2015-04-24 15:34:16)

karol · 2015-04-24 15:43:02

manuelschneid3r wrote:

@karol: For sure, sorry. However it was not meant that seriously at all. I did not expect anybody to react on it in this thread.

I was half-joking - notice the ';P' smiley face :-)

fsckd · 2015-04-24 15:58:35

For the record, the people who manage the AUR are the trusted users. Only one forum moderator is a TU, and that is Xyne. The rest of us are in the same boat as you.

manuelschneid3r · 2015-04-27 13:18:31

Hm there is not much reaction on that request. What to do now?

WorMzy · 2015-04-27 14:10:00

Wait. A TU will disown the package after a grace period of about two weeks.

https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Ar … r_requests

Last edited by WorMzy (2015-04-27 14:10:12)

runical · 2015-04-27 14:10:53

When did you file it? The TUs are only human and won't react immediately

If you really want to know, try mailing to the aur-general list.

EDIT: Too slow...

Last edited by runical (2015-04-27 14:11:22)

ewaller · 2015-04-27 14:13:12

I would suggest the aur-request mail list.

Last edited by ewaller (2015-04-27 14:13:32)

Alad · 2015-04-27 14:44:59

All the while, someone bothered to create this .. thing:

https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/te/t … e/PKGBUILD

wget and tar at its finest.

cedeel · 2015-04-27 17:29:55

Alad, I don't know what to say...

    if [[ $CARCH == "x86_64" ]]; then
        wget -O telegram-bin.tar.xz https://tdesktop.com/linux
    elif [[ $CARCH == "i686" ]]; then
        wget -O telegram-bin.tar.xz https://tdesktop.com/linux
    fi

Someone really understands what that if statement does....

clfarron4 · 2015-04-27 18:44:32

cedeel wrote:

Alad, I don't know what to say...

    if [[ $CARCH == "x86_64" ]]; then
        wget -O telegram-bin.tar.xz https://tdesktop.com/linux
    elif [[ $CARCH == "i686" ]]; then
        wget -O telegram-bin.tar.xz https://tdesktop.com/linux
    fi

Someone really understands what that if statement does....

Isn't that why we have the sources_i686 and sources_x86_64 arrays for PKGBUILDs now?

cedeel · 2015-04-27 21:02:39

clfarron4 wrote:

Isn't that why we have the sources_i686 and sources_x86_64 arrays for PKGBUILDs now?

It is, but completely unneeded in this case.

clfarron4 · 2015-04-28 11:02:56

cedeel wrote:

clfarron4 wrote:
Isn't that why we have the sources_i686 and sources_x86_64 arrays for PKGBUILDs now?
It is, but completely unneeded in this case.

Re-reading the PKGBUILD again, I can see why. I'm still sure that it could be handled quite nicely by a sources array though.

EDIT: Anyways, any changes we suggest should probably be sent to the maintainer, instead of schemed here and then not acted upon XD

Last edited by clfarron4 (2015-04-28 11:12:24)

runical · 2015-04-28 11:19:34

Just for the record, in case OP doesn't check the AUR-general mailing list: It seems that the maintainer lost his password and has requested a reset.

Arch Linux

#1 2015-04-24 14:08:04

Force orphan out-of-date-package

#2 2015-04-24 14:11:01

Re: Force orphan out-of-date-package

#3 2015-04-24 14:22:57

Re: Force orphan out-of-date-package

#4 2015-04-24 14:30:37

Re: Force orphan out-of-date-package

#5 2015-04-24 14:34:08

Re: Force orphan out-of-date-package

#6 2015-04-24 15:32:47

Re: Force orphan out-of-date-package

#7 2015-04-24 15:43:02

Re: Force orphan out-of-date-package

#8 2015-04-24 15:58:35

Re: Force orphan out-of-date-package

#9 2015-04-27 13:18:31

Re: Force orphan out-of-date-package

#10 2015-04-27 14:10:00

Re: Force orphan out-of-date-package

#11 2015-04-27 14:10:53

Re: Force orphan out-of-date-package

#12 2015-04-27 14:13:12

Re: Force orphan out-of-date-package

#13 2015-04-27 14:44:59

Re: Force orphan out-of-date-package

#14 2015-04-27 17:29:55

Re: Force orphan out-of-date-package

#15 2015-04-27 18:44:32

Re: Force orphan out-of-date-package

#16 2015-04-27 21:02:39

Re: Force orphan out-of-date-package

#17 2015-04-28 11:02:56

Re: Force orphan out-of-date-package

#18 2015-04-28 11:19:34

Re: Force orphan out-of-date-package

Board footer