On 24/10/09 09:06AM, Genes Lists wrote:
> Periodic check of Arch out of date packages. This considered are purely
> my opinion of those that are sufficiently 'relevant'. Apologies to any
> others.
>
> The really good news is that there really aren't many !
> Big congrats for the hard work keeping
On Thu, 10 Oct 2024 at 17:26, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> On Thu, 2024-10-10 at 11:55 -0400, Genes Lists wrote:
> > perhaps someone else might be willing to tackle the aur.
>
> Let alone that the AUR also provides outdated software, because it is
> outdated.
>
>
case in point. manual marking requires m
On Thu, 2024-10-10 at 11:55 -0400, Genes Lists wrote:
> perhaps someone else might be willing to tackle the aur.
Hi,
it might be a bit difficult to determine whether AUR packages with the
suffix -git can still be built or whether something essential has
changed, e.g. a new dependency is required.
On Thu, 2024-10-10 at 16:01 +0100, Andy Pieters wrote:
>
> Aur?
Right its a good question. I chose to define 'sufficiently relevant' as
limited to the non-aur packages. And, for amusement, my own aur
packages are up to date 🙂.
perhaps someone else might be willing to tackle the aur.
thanks for
On Wed, 9 Oct 2024 at 14:06, Genes Lists wrote:
> Periodic check of Arch out of date packages. This considered are purely
> my opinion of those that are sufficiently 'relevant'. Apologies to any
> others.
>
>
Aur?
On Wed, 2024-10-09 at 20:50 +0200, Martin Rys wrote:
> Would be nice to use -MM-DD in international channels, which is
> ISO8601 and there is no -DD-MM standard in existence or use to
> confuse it with.
Thanks Martin - good point - will do next time.
best
--
Gene
signature.asc
Descr
Would be nice to use -MM-DD in international channels, which is
ISO8601 and there is no -DD-MM standard in existence or use to
confuse it with.
dkms has had multiple hanging PRs for some time -
https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/packaging/packages/dkms/-/merge_requests/3
and the change
Periodic check of Arch out of date packages. This considered are purely
my opinion of those that are sufficiently 'relevant'. Apologies to any
others.
The really good news is that there really aren't many !
Big congrats for the hard work keeping Arch awesome and up to date.
Note that, some are e
