Thanks for your advices in detail! On 2012-02-16 07:41:59, Alexander R鴇seth wrote: > Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2012 07:41:59 +0100 > From: Alexander R鴇seth <[email protected]> > To: "Discussion about the Arch User Repository (AUR)" > <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [aur-general] for queueRAM -- about perForce software issues > Reply-To: "Discussion about the Arch User Repository (AUR)" > <[email protected]> > Message-ID: > <CAG7ayys98bpHfo_LeS2Vrp5G=94ncqd4ac+dlxeve2gt4c0...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > List-Id: "Discussion about the Arch User Repository \(AUR\)" > <aur-general.archlinux.org> > > Hi, > > If the hash sum test fails, it's a nice check and reminder if anything > changed since the PKGBUILD was last looked at. Unless Perforce > releases new versions very often, it may be a good idea that the > PKGBUILD keeps failing when the source changes, so that it gets > reviewed again. > > If there are new releases semi-daily/semi-weekly and you really trust > upstream, using curl or wget to download the file in question in > build() would work, but I'm not sure if it would qualify as the Arch > Way. > > Good luck with the PKGBUILD in any case. > > -- > Cordially, > 燗lexander R鴇seth > 燗rch Linux Trusted User > ?(xyproto on IRC, trontonic on AUR)
