Am Dienstag, dem 16.03.2021 um 19:03 +0100 schrieb Georg via arch-
general:
> Make a proposal at the relevant places or
> leave it, but this topic has made enough noise on this list.
Love it or leave it? I will leave it.
Am Dienstag, dem 16.03.2021 um 12:47 -0300 schrieb Giancarlo Razzolini
via arch-general:
> The projects involved here, pacman, archweb and aurweb are all
> open source and can receive patches.
I would suggest that the Arch community agrees on the topic first
before starting multiple parallel discu
Am Donnerstag, dem 11.03.2021 um 16:15 +0100 schrieb Lars Gustäbel:
> I really don't know what you're trying to prove here. I would be
> interested in
> which words you would propose to distinguish between the two
> contexts.
The pacman defintion is a local definition which only applies to an
indi
Am Donnerstag, dem 11.03.2021 um 11:23 -0300 schrieb Giancarlo
Razzolini:
> This is different from the orphan in the context of a package
> manager.
> As long as you don't conflate
> both contexts, it's very easy to understand the differences between
> these orphans.
Sure, I understand the differ
Am Donnerstag, dem 11.03.2021 um 08:09 +0100 schrieb Reto:
> It's not the same context...
>
> A "fork" is an eating utensil that you use to shove food into your
> mouth.
> However, a "fork" is also a software project that is based of some
> prior work.
> It's also a point where a road diverges int
Hi,
in the arch world I see two different definition of an "orphan".
The pacman manpage says:
orphans - packages that were installed as dependencies
but are no longer required by any installed package.
For the AUR the definition of an "orphan" is
If all maintainers of a
