> Sorry, I was in a rush. That should have been "statically linked", and > "suffix". Hi "white spirit" guys, In those uncertain situations, like that one, I'm expectedly (personally) waiting for a clarification of one of our solid and stoick devvers — Xyne, Levente, Morten, ... You guys, you may have to bring out a ray of light on those or similar kind of debating. -- Kind regards, Radislav (Radicchio) Golubtsov (Sent from myMail for Android) Saturday, 18 December 2021, 09:40PM +03:00 from Xyne via aur-general aur-general@lists.archlinux.org :
> >The -bin prefix is used for packages that package upstream binaries but the > assumption is typically that the resulting package is functionally equivalent > to the one built on Arch from source. That is why our policy is to delete -bin > package variants of binary packages in the official repos. > > In this case, the upstream binaries are not functionally equivalent because > they are statically compiled and thus avoid a bug. They should be allowed on > the AUR, but the prefix should be something to indicate that it is not just a > -bin variant of the official package. Perhaps -static-bin would be > appropriate. > > The real solution is though is to fix the packages in the repos. > >Sorry, I was in a rush. That should have been "statically linked", and >"suffix". > >Regards, >Xyne
