Xavier wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 6:58 PM, clemens fischer wrote:
>
>> is there a regular expression describing the version comparison
>> algorithm in pacman/lib/libalpm/package.c::alpm_pkg_vercmp()?
>
> Could you give an example of what you are trying to do?
simple example, looking for the
On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 6:58 PM, clemens
fischer wrote:
> Hi,
>
> is there a regular expression describing the version comparison
> algorithm in pacman/lib/libalpm/package.c::alpm_pkg_vercmp()?
>
> I have a pacman wrapper (bash script) that needs to determine the
> package name to give to pacman giv
In May a user brought up that the packages of Transmission have been out
of date for some time and submitted a new PKGBUILD which concluded in
the packages being updated. But since then the packages haven't been
updated. So once again these packages have been out of date for some
time now. And
Hi,
is there a regular expression describing the version comparison
algorithm in pacman/lib/libalpm/package.c::alpm_pkg_vercmp()?
I have a pacman wrapper (bash script) that needs to determine the
package name to give to pacman given a directory name, because it is
possible to give globs to filena
The amarok-svn and amarok2-svn are packaging the same. And even if one
of them would package svn version of amarok 1 it would not be
necessary because the Amarok 1.x development was discontinued and thus
amarok1 package is the only necessary for Amarok 1.4.
2009/7/3 Stefan Husmann :
> Manne Merak
Manne Merak schrieb:
Will Siddall wrote:
Each of these packages are for a different purpose. Obviously
amarok-svn is to download the latest amarok from subversion,
amarok2-svn is so people get the latest build of amarok2 from
subversion and amarok1 would be for those people who want the 1.4.10
On Friday 03 July 2009 16:28:13 Thomas Bächler wrote:
> devtools and db scripts should accept whatever resides in staging IMO,
> regardless of the compression. So if Andy (for example) wants smaller
> OOo packages, he simply sets makepkg to use .xz, uploads it and devtools
> adds the .xz package (n
Excerpts from Xavier's message of Fri Jul 03 10:30:32 -0400 2009:
> On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 3:33 PM, Andrei Thorp wrote:
> >
> > Another possible issue is the question of whether this sort of
> > compression works as well for the deltas system in pacman.
>
> This only depends on the following trivi
On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 3:33 PM, Andrei Thorp wrote:
>
> Another possible issue is the question of whether this sort of
> compression works as well for the deltas system in pacman.
This only depends on the following trivial patch to xdelta3 (add xz support) :
http://code.google.com/p/xdelta/issues/
Pierre Schmitz schrieb:
On Friday 03 July 2009 16:02:38 Thomas Bächler wrote:
Our db scripts and devtools always assume .tar.gz though, this is also
easy to change.
Patches are already in git. But atm it does only support one compression
method at once. So we either need a patch to allow both
Pierre Schmitz wrote:
On Friday 03 July 2009 16:02:38 Thomas Bächler wrote:
Our db scripts and devtools always assume .tar.gz though, this is also
easy to change.
Patches are already in git. But atm it does only support one compression
method at once. So we either need a patch to allo
On Friday 03 July 2009 16:02:38 Thomas Bächler wrote:
> Our db scripts and devtools always assume .tar.gz though, this is also
> easy to change.
Patches are already in git. But atm it does only support one compression
method at once. So we either need a patch to allow both during transition or
w
Nathan K. Bathory schrieb:
read through the archived posts, i'm sure this was discussed already ..
iirc the issue was with implementing this in libarchive and some
licensing issues.
Actually, pacman does support xz and lzma decompression (except one
lzma/xz-related bug in libarchive which wil
On Friday 03 July 2009 15:28:22 Nathan K. Bathory wrote:
> read through the archived posts, i'm sure this was discussed already ..
> iirc the issue was with implementing this in libarchive and some
> licensing issues.
pacman can already handle xz compressed packages (using libarchive). Support
fo
Excerpts from Nathan K. Bathory's message of Fri Jul 03 09:28:22 -0400 2009:
> On Fri, 03 Jul 2009 09:24:32 -0400
> Andrei Thorp wrote:
>
> > Excerpts from b4283's message of Fri Jul 03 06:32:14 -0400 2009:
> > > i guess one of the major concerns is that tar & gzip is more common
> > > than xz. b
On Fri, 03 Jul 2009 09:24:32 -0400
Andrei Thorp wrote:
> Excerpts from b4283's message of Fri Jul 03 06:32:14 -0400 2009:
> > i guess one of the major concerns is that tar & gzip is more common
> > than xz. but since GNU is also packing their coreutils in xz packs,
> > i guess that a good time to
Excerpts from b4283's message of Fri Jul 03 06:32:14 -0400 2009:
> i guess one of the major concerns is that tar & gzip is more common than xz.
> but since GNU is also packing their coreutils in xz packs, i guess that
> a good time to switch?
Well, one nice thing about being a distro is that you
Will Siddall wrote:
> as the version numbers show, amarok-svn is for amarok1 while
> amarok2-svn is... well, you know.
That's not right. Actually, both packages build a svn version of amarok2.
as the version numbers show, amarok-svn is for amarok1 while
amarok2-svn is... well, you know.
On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 9:28 AM, Manne Merak wrote:
> Will Siddall wrote:
>>
>> Each of these packages are for a different purpose. Obviously
>> amarok-svn is to download the latest amarok from subversio
Will Siddall wrote:
Each of these packages are for a different purpose. Obviously
amarok-svn is to download the latest amarok from subversion,
amarok2-svn is so people get the latest build of amarok2 from
subversion and amarok1 would be for those people who want the 1.4.10
build of amarok becaus
Each of these packages are for a different purpose. Obviously
amarok-svn is to download the latest amarok from subversion,
amarok2-svn is so people get the latest build of amarok2 from
subversion and amarok1 would be for those people who want the 1.4.10
build of amarok because they are reluctant t
Corrently Archlinux uses a tar+gzip combination and it works nicely.
But right now there's a stable lzma compression available using "tar Jcvf",
which could create much smaller packages and still fast decompressions.
(of course you need to have xz-utils)
think about all the bandwidth that could b
hollun...@gmx.at wrote:
On Fri, 03 Jul 2009 11:59:51 +0300
Biru Ionut wrote:
hollun...@gmx.at wrote:
On Fri, 03 Jul 2009 10:49:16 +0200
Manne Merak wrote:
Hi, how do I know which AUR package to use if there are multiples?
check last updated date?
For example, there is amarok
On Fri, 03 Jul 2009 11:59:51 +0300
Biru Ionut wrote:
> hollun...@gmx.at wrote:
> > On Fri, 03 Jul 2009 10:49:16 +0200
> > Manne Merak wrote:
> >
> >> Hi, how do I know which AUR package to use if there are multiples?
> >> check last updated date?
> >> For example, there is amarok-svn and amarok
hollun...@gmx.at wrote:
On Fri, 03 Jul 2009 10:49:16 +0200
Manne Merak wrote:
Hi, how do I know which AUR package to use if there are multiples?
check last updated date?
For example, there is amarok-svn and amarok2-svn, but amarok2-svn was
last updated in beginning of Jun, amarok-svn yesterda
On Fri, 03 Jul 2009 10:49:16 +0200
Manne Merak wrote:
> Hi, how do I know which AUR package to use if there are multiples?
> check last updated date?
> For example, there is amarok-svn and amarok2-svn, but amarok2-svn was
> last updated in beginning of Jun, amarok-svn yesterday.
>
> Manne
Are
Hi, how do I know which AUR package to use if there are multiples? check
last updated date?
For example, there is amarok-svn and amarok2-svn, but amarok2-svn was
last updated in beginning of Jun, amarok-svn yesterday.
Manne
27 matches
Mail list logo
