Acroread and Acroread9??

tcmdvm · 2009-03-25 20:38:54

There is currently a package named acroread 8.13-1. It has been flagged out of date because a new version has now available (just announced today).

A new package acroread9 9.1-1 has now appeared. It is based on the same package as the above with changes needed to down load the new version. It also gives them credit for the package. However, it changes the name.

I think the proper thing to do would have been to allow the maintainer of acroread 8.13-1 time to either upgrade the package or disown it before making an entirely new package.

Keeping the same package name and upgrading the package when new versions are available is much easier than having acroread, acroread9, or when version 10 is available acroread10.

kakTuZ · 2009-03-25 20:52:56

There is no need to take any action now. Just wait a few days. I am sure the acroread package will update to the newest available version soon.
If you can't wait thaaaaat long, take the acroread9 PKGBUILD and change the package name to acroread.

Inxsible · 2009-03-25 21:07:34

I guess someone just wanted to have their hands on the acroread package and jumped the gun on the 9 version. obviously he had to change the name because he cannot use the same name as the one that is already in AUR. But as mentioned earlier, you can wait until the acroread author updates or you can take the acroread9 and change the name to acroread and then install.

EDIT : BTW, I just searched AUR and there are 19 different versions of acroread -- some on version numbers, others with different language support.

http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?O … _Search=Go

I guess you are the maintainer of the bin32-acroread package, which only caters to x86_64 architecture i think. Sharpee created one for i686 architecture. I guess you guys could talk it out and merge it if the rest of the PKGBUILD is the same. I haven't gone thru all the differences in the PKGBUILDs.

Last edited by Inxsible (2009-03-25 21:20:51)

jelly · 2009-03-26 10:24:45

Yesterday i wanted to update and orphan the adobe9 pacakage but someone else already did it , i have the PKGBuild and mail it to the maintainer, i think he will upgrade it.

Shouldn't the bin versions be deleted, there are now so many versions of the same package

Gen2ly · 2009-03-26 11:05:18

Adobe's done a good job bringing flash to 64 bit, a bit off topic but, have they done so with Acroread 9?

jelly · 2009-03-26 11:57:12

Gen2ly wrote:

Adobe's done a good job bringing flash to 64 bit, a bit off topic but, have they done so with Acroread 9?

Well c'mon you can check it at adobe's site http://www.adobe.com/products/reader/

Gen2ly · 2009-03-26 15:56:29

Yeah that real intuitive. Doesn't seem to be that hard of a question.

Last edited by Gen2ly (2009-03-26 15:57:02)

skottish · 2009-03-26 16:38:48

Gen2ly wrote:

Adobe's done a good job bringing flash to 64 bit, a bit off topic but, have they done so with Acroread 9?

The Mozilla Foundation in conjunction with Adobe made 64 bit Flash possible. If a high profile open source project (read: lots of developers with money) were to help, it would probably get done more quickly.

Arch Linux

#1 2009-03-25 20:38:54

Acroread and Acroread9??

#2 2009-03-25 20:52:56

Re: Acroread and Acroread9??

#3 2009-03-25 21:07:34

Re: Acroread and Acroread9??

#4 2009-03-26 10:24:45

Re: Acroread and Acroread9??

#5 2009-03-26 11:05:18

Re: Acroread and Acroread9??

#6 2009-03-26 11:57:12

Re: Acroread and Acroread9??

#7 2009-03-26 15:56:29

Re: Acroread and Acroread9??

#8 2009-03-26 16:38:48

Re: Acroread and Acroread9??

Board footer