Contributing packages.

Hi all,
just a short note for contributing packages to arch linux. i was browsing through the incoming directory today at ftp.archlinux.org and noticed an over abundance of regular packages in there. while there is generally no problem with this it prevents me or Xentac from including them in the unofficial or unstable trees. so if you are contributing a package to arch linux there are just a few small requst that we have in order to consider your packages for inclusion in the trees.
what one needs to provide is:
their PKGBUILD, filelist, and the package itself. place them in a directory named after the package then tarball this directory. then you may upload this tarball.
without a PKGBUILD your packages will never be included in the trees. i will not reverse engineer a PKGBUILD to go with the package. A PKGBUILD is absolutely required by tree maintainers.
i will endeavour to contact those individuals who have uploaded packages only to incoming but if this post gets to you first please do the above in order for your packages to be included.
EDIT: oh yes there will be more documantation regarding packages soon so please check the documentation periodically.

Hi Jeff;
_JeffG_ wrote:
I have 2 things to say about my package I built.
1. It does not include a filelist in my tarball. Simply I did a 'makepkg -c' so it cleaned things up since I thought because it was something that was generated with a makepkg automatically.
2. What about a naming convention to our uploaded packages containing the filelist, PKGBUILD, and actual package.. Maybe something like packagename-1.0.pkgsrc.tar.gz or something to differentiate it from a real package with the .pkg.tar.gz or the orignal source tarball of simply .tar.gz. I was not sure how to name mine.
Jeff
1. I think makepkg -c 's intention is mostly to make quick rebuilds of
packages, for optimization on a certain machine. If you really wanna
contribute your stuff, clean up the source manually and keep .filelist -
In other words: don't use makepkg -c then.
2. I don't think it is good to name *.pkg.tar.gz. As you mentioned, it's too
easy to confuse them whith real packages. If you insert an pkgsrc - well
maybe its good, but not necessary I think. Most people name them after
the source tar-balls, sometimes using tar.bz2 instead of the far common
tar.gz. It's gonna be useful to keep the version number - maintainer can
filter out easier outdated packages.
bye neri

Similar Messages

Contributing Packages - The Current State

There has been some confusion going around when contributing packages. A lot of changes are going on now with the new TUR system, the AUR. The new AUR will have a nice systematic way of submitting packages. But currently, there are two ways to submit packages.
1) Post a PKGBUILD and build scripts of the New and Requested Packages category of the forum. TURs and developers will look through these PKGBUILDs and pick up any that look interesting to them, and put them in a repository.
2) Send a PKGBUILD to the tur-mailing list (http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/tur-users/). All the TURs will definately see your PKGBUILD if you post it on the mailing list. Many TURs prefer new packages on the list, because they will definately see it. Some TURs don't look at the forum as much as others.
To be on the safe side, you can do both.
Here are some dont's:
1) DONT submit packages to incoming. No one looks at incoming. Incoming is dead. Incoming is from the old package submittal submission system, which is now being replaced with the AUR.
2) DONT submit packages without PKGBUILD scripts. No one wants a package from an untrusted source that could contain malicious code.
3) DONT forget to include all files in your submission: .install files, PKGBUILDs, startup scripts, etc.
4) DONT put patchfiles up on the forum: the forum will mess up the formatting of the patch. Upload the patch somewhere and post a link.
5) DONT use namcap as your only resource for dependencies. Check ./configure --help, README, INSTALL, and the website of the program. Namcap is a guide, don't use it as truth.
6) DONT use the license field yet. A standard hasn't been decided of what to put there yet, so don't use it yet.
7) DONT add a maintainer comment to your PKGBUILD unless you have a repository and you maintain it. Put a contributor comment instead.
There we go: If everyone reads these, that will cut down on 90% of the submissions we have to fix :twisted:

Could you transfer that message over into my sticky thread of "finding and creating new packages". I think this fits well with that.

Zlm-server-utils contributed package

I would like to announce the zlm-server-utils contributed RPM. This is in
no way affiliated with Novell and has no implied warranty. The RPM
includes two Perl scripts which help with the management of package sets in
ZLM.
Feel free to read the release notes on our SourceForge site:
https://sourceforge.net/project/show...ease_id=297880
The RPM is available for download here:
https://sourceforge.net/project/show...group_id=34678
/Brian/
Brian Long
Cisco Systems, Inc.

Brilong,
It appears that in the past few days you have not received a response to your
posting. That concerns us, and has triggered this automated reply.
Has your problem been resolved? If not, you might try one of the following options:
- Do a search of our knowledgebase at http://support.novell.com/search/kb_index.jsp
- Check all of the other support tools and options available at
http://support.novell.com.
- You could also try posting your message again. Make sure it is posted in the
correct newsgroup. (http://support.novell.com/forums)
Be sure to read the forum FAQ about what to expect in the way of responses:
http://support.novell.com/forums/faq_general.html
If this is a reply to a duplicate posting, please ignore and accept our apologies
and rest assured we will issue a stern reprimand to our posting bot.
Good luck!
Your Novell Product Support Forums Team
http://support.novell.com/forums/

Cannot publish new .htm file with Contribute

A client of mine is having an issue with a webpage he
maintains daily using the Contribute package, and one major problem
has come up while trying to add new features to his presentation.
Instead of linking directly to a file as has been done in the past,
his primary web designer has created a new pop-up style (on demand)
window that presents video in one portion and an advertisement in
the rest. Unfortunately, this option did not come with an
associated template - he merely configured the page to link to a
.txt file as Contribute would not let the user (Administrator)
upload a new .htm file.
My question if anyone might have a few moments to respond, is
whether or not this is a feasible thing to manage? .txt files work
in Internet Explorer browsers, but fail on more standards compliant
options such as Firefox or Apple's Safari (3.0 beta tested on PC,
other versions tested on MacOS X) in which case they merely result
in the presentation of a plaintext file in a pop-up window.
Can a new template be created in Contribute, and files
generated from this? Is this a technical quick-fix situation, or a
more involved problem that requires Dreamweaver or other template
creation options?
Sorry to be rather vague on this one, it's a particularly
complex situation (with a bit of a time crunch) on the user end,
and I'm hoping to track down any information I can.
- J. Johnston

Sorry about being rather vague there, I had the client
sitting with his head literally peeking over my shoulder and that
made things a little trickier to actually parse a few times in my
own head before posting.
I went through and learned a bit about roles yesterday when I
was trying to tackle this issue, so what you're suggesting does
sound like what I tried to do. However, there were two issues that
I ran into that remained a problem. First, I couldn't tell what
role his Contribute was configured to use on his website. It
appeared to be Administrator, and the one user account set up in
the roles listing is his, but even with this set, I still got the
error message saying I didn't have permission to create new .htm,
.html, .php, etc. pages on the site.
His website was initially created by a rather poor designer,
whose idea when confronted with being unable to upload .htm files,
was to use the .txt extension - because "Internet Explorer treats
.txt as HTML, so what's the loss?"
The essence of what the client is trying to accomplish, is
this: He produces video content for a local news website, and
uploads a handful of videos every weeknight. In the past, his
webpage has simply offered a link where users clicked on an image
and immediately downloaded a .wvx file which loaded up Windows
Media Player (or Quicktime with Flip4Mac installed) and played his
playlist of advertisements and news content. His new method
involves clicking a link, which pops up a new window, which plays
the video file embedded with an advertisement next to it in a
table. These pop-up pages are the ones that don't seem to want to
transfer up through Contribute.
I hope this clarifies things a little, and I really
appreciate your help.

Searching for and Creating New Packages -- READ THIS FIRST

This is here simply for historical reasons nowadays, to serve as a reminder to all why the AUR is such a great thing. The original text follows:
===================================
It has occurred to me that there is alot of reinventing the wheel going on around here. There are copies of virtually the same PKGBUILD made by three or four different people that failed to check if it already existed floating around.
INSTRUCTIONS FOR FINDING OUT IF A PACKAGE ALREADY EXISTS:
1. Check to see if it's in an official repo: http://www.archlinux.org/packages.php (or use pacman -Ss pkgname)
2.. Check to see if it's in an unofficial repo or tur: http://wiki2.archlinux.org/index.php/Un … positories and http://xentac.net/~tur/repos.php
3. Check if it has been posted in this forum before: http://bbs.archlinux.org/search.php in that dialogue, I suggest that you select "New and Requested Packages" from the Forum: menu, this way you get only the results you're interested in.
4. Check in incoming (soon to be deprecated, and already a mess, but you may just find it there...) ftp://ftp.archlinux.org/incoming
5. If you didn't find it in any of these places, then it has more than likely not been packaged before, and you can go ahead and follow the instructions at http://archlinux.org/docs/en/guide/inst … e.html#abs to package it, then share it on the forums.
Thank you for your cooperation, and happy packaging!

There has been some confusion going around when contributing packages. A lot of changes are going on now with the new TUR system, the AUR. The new AUR will have a nice systematic way of submitting packages. But currently, there are two ways to submit packages.
1) Post a PKGBUILD and build scripts of the New and Requested Packages category of the forum. TURs and developers will look through these PKGBUILDs and pick up any that look interesting to them, and put them in a repository.
2) Send a PKGBUILD to the tur-mailing list (http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/tur-users/). All the TURs will definately see your PKGBUILD if you post it on the mailing list. Many TURs prefer new packages on the list, because they will definately see it. Some TURs don't look at the forum as much as others.
To be on the safe side, you can do both.
Here are some dont's:
1) DONT submit packages to incoming. No one looks at incoming. Incoming is dead. Incoming is from the old package submittal submission system, which is now being replaced with the AUR.
2) DONT submit packages without PKGBUILD scripts. No one wants a package from an untrusted source that could contain malicious code.
3) DONT forget to include all files in your submission: .install files, PKGBUILDs, startup scripts, etc.
4) DONT put patchfiles up on the forum: the forum will mess up the formatting of the patch. Upload the patch somewhere and post a link.
5) DONT use namcap as your only resource for dependencies. Check ./configure --help, README, INSTALL, and the website of the program. Namcap is a guide, don't use it as truth.
6) DONT use the license field yet. A standard hasn't been decided of what to put there yet, so don't use it yet.
7) DONT add a maintainer comment to your PKGBUILD unless you have a repository and you maintain it. Put a contributor comment instead.
There we go: If everyone reads these, that will cut down on 90% of the submissions we have to fix :twisted: :evil:

No Package for Amavisd-new?

I was building a mail server on Arch today and got Postfix up and running great however I happened to notice when it came time to download Amavisd-new, it was not available in my Pacman repos. Anyone tell me if I am missing something or why such wide used tool like Amavisd-new was omitted from the package repository? Anyone know?

http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/AUR
The Arch Linux User-Community Repository (AUR) is a community-driven repository of PKGBUILDS (no binaries) for Arch users. The AUR was initially conceived to organize the sharing of PKGBUILDs amongst the wider community and to expedite the inclusion of popular user-contributed packages into the community repo.
It is called the birthplace of Arch's new packages--in the AUR, the users contribute their own packages. The AUR community votes for or against them, and once a package has been voted high enough, a AUR Trusted User takes it to the [community] repository, which is accessible via pacman and ABS.

Rather than persists in the future thread...

The point I was making would be for Archs documents to pick up where man pages leave off, but whatever.
If you think I stated Arch must fix man pages, not so. I was intending to show that docs as a whole, leave whole subjects unhandled, Arch could provide the answers in its own docs and come out as a hero.
Or maybe not.
And remember, users who cannot configure ppp cannot get on the internet to get the ppp configuration docs. Or any other docs, for that matter. One failed configuration needing web documents might leave the newbie stranded.
Or maybe not.
I personally think that a lot of configuration has to be made before Linux (Arch or others) will communicate over the internet to a remote website, so as to allow documentation to be visible..... but hey, maybe I missed something? Like the document to get a modem setup? So I could get web based documents? Chicken and egg?
Maybe not, eh?
As for the concept of needing to be an experienced admin - these folks usually do not need any docs. That compares to bad docs to a newbie - essentially no docs. Missing docs and no internet access are also useless. Thus, the newbie without documents needs the only thing which gets anyone else through the issue - the newbie needs experience, because the docs are weak or missing or erroneous. Try as you might, that is an issue I went through. Take, for example, when I needed network assistance. Archs forums were not the first place I went asking for help, believe me; I asked and am still asking. 2 years now, and I'm just getting told Samba. Need I say this is baloney? That issue is not Archs fault, but Arch could have a smashing success on its hands if it were to document a few critical areas as well as 0.2 was documented.
Installing and partitioning... What can I say... apeiro is not mentioning anything I've PM'd him about: secondary hard disks getting reformatted. My pm brought me the answer that most Archers never repartition, so the script was.... well, I guess you could say it was a shot in the dark. Fine, but the PM stated the alternative was something like 'I usually use the commandline stuff and simply reformat the existing partitions'.
Why the **** would an inexperienced newbie set up partitions outside of using the installer?? The Arch docs tells the newbie to use the installer to partition their hard disks! What, exactly, is the newbies idea of an installers purpose? Are you a newbie when you decide what a newbie has for skills? The installer obliterated gigabytes of data, I trusted that it was going to perform safely, and yet nobody ever used it to learn of the glitch? Ooookkaaaaayyyy.
Folks, the docs said to use the installer. Never mentioned possibly partitioning from the command line. Take your pick, the newbie was not at fault for following the docs.
I'll run along, because I cannot possibly be speaking truth. Neither am I telling you where I had problems. This is cannot be feedback, it must be dunbars rantings. Does Arch have a future when feedback is considered trolling or flaming the developers? Lighten up, folks, I had once been trying to offer help and sought to get help.
I know this is a labor of love for you all; in many ways, Linux is a labor of mine as well. Sadly, you are not hearing some issue that could help make Arch the distro that some folks want it to be.

dunbar wrote:Step by step: I mentioned a few weak areas that newbies would not know how to address.
I mentioned that newbie would not necessarily have the skills to get the correct docs from a myriad of websites.
Which appear (and frequently are) obsolete.
Well, then we include the docs and then non-newbies would complain that we are cluttering the filesytem and you would complain because those documents are obsolete. sound familiar? i have seen this argument before and there is not winning it. people bitch about the manpages, docs, etc ALL THE TIME. you must know that. so the best we can do is add your concerns to our own documents and add necessary documents to the files.
When their internet connection was what had failed, the internet doc is not available.
And when they had no Xwindows in which to read HTML documents,
and nothing tells the newbie about CLI browsers.
i would expect that no absolute green newbies would try arch so those newbies that do show up i would assume have some linux experience (one can be a newbie and have some experience) so i would assume that they would know about lynx or links browsers or at least know how to use cat and less.
another point about this is that if a newbie does not even know how to use cat, less, or a cli editor to view files then they would be very very f**ked with arch linux and having self contained documents would be pretty pointless. so again i would ask is it not wise to print out/write down any relevent install/configuration instructions? you do know how to write since you already say you don't have a printer?
okay so if we include install configuration data in the installer will you know how to access it? is it fair to tell the user that it is in such and such directory and you can access it through say vc1-4? should we scrap our online docs altogether and just have them self contained?
The network thing was changed along the way - IPX/SPX was part of the issue, my 5 port switch is another part. I am not berating you, sarah31, nor am I asking anyone to re-write man pages, etc. as several posts seemed to attribute to me. The man pages are the weak spot, Arch docs need to go from there. Never wanted to say more than that.
and all i wanted to know is what apps do we extend our documentation to? all of them? are you saying that all our apps need extended docs? can you point me to one distro that has extended documents of all their applications? besides ppp what would YOU extend? it is fair to ask this of arch developers/users but they really need to know just what manpages are defunct and have no bearing on arch.
i would not expect a request like this would get fulfilled too quickly there are lots of applications' man pages and docs to go through then the developers would have to determine what is needed and what is not.
as for manpages......i used to find them unreliable but to be honest most manpages i have viewed lately have been very clear and concise about how to operate/configure apps. i am not saying this to contradict you but i say it honestly. when i have been unable to find someone to ask on this forum or irc manpages normally do the trick for me. (and don't say it is because i am some expert with linux because i a definitely not)
I'm trying to point out that A] with a presumed goal of gaining Linux users,
B] Arch, being small, uncluttered and likely attractive to newbies (small draws newbies because it is so small (dialup accessible but only one big download at a time) and older systems where XP won't fit on their disks, etc) and also
C] since Arch had very tight documents covering what needed to be done (but might need more topics covered), I felt that was likely going to lead to newbies arriving here in some situations that
D] Arch clearly tries to assume will not need the attentions of forum members (which have the skills) and
E] the newbie does not have the skills.
That would lead to the assumption that Arch was not interested in the users needs.
with respect to this.....well what can i say but you are a complete ***hole. for one thing small does not always attract newbies in fact i know ALOT ALOT ALOT of people that will not even try arch or similar distros because they are small. most people want the choice to kludge up their system if they like but arch is not in this realm yet because we do not offer alot of packages.
i agree we need more stuff covered in our documents and you would not find a single user or developer that would disagree with you. So i guess this point you make throws out your idea of extending the manpages because that is not a concise project (for example manpages for transcode are good but to get into all the basics a newbie would need to know would require one to be alot more verbose similarily with networking documents)?
to say that we here do not pay attention to users is ABSOLUTELY THE WRONG ANSWER. there are only two pages of unanswered post and considering there are always post that are merely statements that do not need to be answered that is very good. in fact if you even bothered to check there are only 79 unanswered posts out of 4512. that's 1.75% of the posts on the forum are unanswered. besides that there are always questions that no one has an answer to. obscure problems do exist i know i have hit many in my ventures in any OS.
besides this forums are a free service. no one is under obligation to use it user AND developers alike. no one is paid here so don't diss anyone and don't feel that anyone is obligated to answer you.
i can also say that you are a complete arrogant ass for saying arch does not care about its users. we don't care about you that is for certain. but i can guarantee that everything i did every package i made, upgraded, donated, fixed, etc was for the user. people wanted openoffice i spent a week building it then it got broken with the upgrade to gcc 3.3 i spent another week trying to fix it without luck then judd spent 3 days compiling and patching 1.1. so do you EVER say we don't fucking care you little ingrate.
The perceived 'lack of clarity' on my part is because I am still a newbie. I might have a few things working under Slackware, but I'm not certain, today, where I even made the changes. I'm not asking for hints on how to keep a notebook, I have one, it is 40 miles away, I cannot discuss Linux by reading my notes or grepping my config files, they are 40 miles away. I cannot log into my Linux PC, I only have dial up, the only telephone line in my house is for voice communications. DSL is too far away, Cable is too expensive.... have I never said any of this before? No, not in this thread, but I've always been a hardliner on those points sarah31. I do not match up with what is assumed of me. But here I am, posting, despite my ineptitude.
"Waaagh i'm a newbie. waggh i don't have highspeed pity me pity meee!"
there are lots of users on dialup here including developers so we don't give a flying f**k.
I believe the deepest undercurrent I see here is diverging viewpoints of what Arch is and diverging goals for Arch. My views are different from a few who assume the Archer has the skills, hApy seems to have a third viewpoint, and yet a third viewpoint exists.
yeah and you are saying we have to conform to your view. typical. funny we seem to be getting more and more users all the time both newbie and non newbie and this despite having a completely uncaring development team and a horrendous set of docs. one of the funny things is that many of the newbies recently are all dialup like you and they still take time to make irc interesting or contribute packages.
If my posts reflect an atmosphere of bewildering viewpoiints, I'm not surprised - I've tried to reply to differing posts which take differing opinions; I suppose it is frustrating to anyone to reply to 3 posts at once. I'm replying in order to offer my view of when I was a frustrated newbie (this morning, I think ;-) ). Remember, I was told by a certain forum member that, most certainly, dunbar was a slackware user and the assumption was that he must be nearly expert - yet, I declared, no, I'm not an expert and I freely admit a lack of skills. I was not the one who estimated dunbars skills, Sarah31.
oh you are soooo subtle in your insults. come on you tell me after hundreds of installs and two years of using linux you don't know anything? find me five green newbies that know how to grep or know to look online for information. personally i and many others here and elsewhere have little time for someone who cries about being a newbie when they obviously aren't.
what is it some sort of ploy to make people feel sorry for you or shorten your look online for info that you likely could find in two minutes? spare me. up to one year you are a n00b after that you are not.
I'm definitely not interested in dissing anyone, not you, nor Gyroplast, nor Apeiro, nor hApy .....
hmmm you care to stand by that or should i pull out several quotes to the contrary?
I have pointed out that early on, Arch was interested in being Judds perfect distro... did anyone ask him if he ever said that? As I said, I can offer to cut and paste, if you wish.
so your point is? is this a bad thing? is it not possible for many of us to believe it is the perfect distro for us as well? why not diss yoper for claiming to be THE distro.
Yet, I'm clearly getting 2 viewpoints in response to me repeating that fact. Thus, in order to push the reader away from their position, so as to get them to walk in my shoes, I post from different directions aiming toward one central condition. Is the issue me, and me alone? Or did the issue exist, and I'm guilty of responding to all viewpoints and thus I'm guilty of pointing it out?
i have been in your shoes and i often get put back in your shoes when i start to use or investigate applications or areas of linux i have never explored before. so whats your point? if it was to fix up the documentation? that was a goal for some time now in fact a few users have made it an ongoing thing.
you are not the only one that is a newbie here nor are you the only one here. there are many things that developers must balance when they do their duties. there will never be a distro that will satisfy all a user's needs but i can tell you that the arch team does try to please as many people as possible. so yeah i think you are the issue to some extent. you could have come in here and politely explained what it is that you felt needed improvement but instead you came in and whine and cried that you were so abused and that we had to change to please you. it was all about you anyone can easily extract that from the way you keep flipping between i'm a newbie, i'm not a newbie but i speak for newbies. if you cannot find the offesive comments you have made along the way or see how some people came to the conclusions they did then it is your fault.
Anyway, you mentioned the ethernet thread.... thydian is evidently new here. Lets explain that issue out loud (since you already raised the matter). I offered to write a document regarding Ethernet setup, I was not shown what to do (frozdsolid posted that they were "pretty sure that's necessary"). I do not assume that every member here reads every posted message; thus, I believe I had read the opinion of someone who was as newbie to Arch as I myself was a newbie (frozdsolids title still shows only 4 posts even today). Nobody here 'handed me an answer' as some might conclude from your post.
well YOU may not have gotten answer but people DID try to answer your question and, in fact, the answer is there. but you could not extract it or did not know how to ask the question properly to get the result you desired.
but of course we are the bad guys here because we took the time to try and give you an answer. man you are such a wanker....
I posted everywhere else on the internet about my situation using IPX/SPX, I heard that it was a dead protocol. I finally found information about IPX/SPX, it was not herein, so the forum was of no use in that instance - that is a fact, sarah31. Now that I have concluded that IPX/SPX was not the best choice and changed the rest of the household over to TCP/IP...... the IPX/SPX issue is no longer the focus, so I dropped the subject; until I was 6 months later, I came back here, saw BluPhoenixs post and was a bit confused. That lead to him suggesting DOSemu, I stated no, that was not preferred, etc. etc. I ultimately thanked BluPhoenix, stated why I was going to drop the issue, and I left the thread cold.
so why insist on blaming us for something that we tried to answer but was obviously beyond our knowledge? you did it at the end of that thread and you constantly do it here. how many other people did you verbally assault along the way?
The whole thing got misdirected, away from what I was asking for, as if the topic was no longer my decision alone.
what a pile of BS. it was YOUR thread so get in there and assert yourself. threads get out of hand sometimes but the original poster can easily get control again if they have a pair.
i know for a fact that the people he chose to insult would and have tried to help him but he blows them off. i know too that the head developer is VERY open to user contributions yet dunbar chose not to contribute.
The reasons should be evident by now - when I offered to contribute, I had the time; 6 months of time transpired, I was not able to write because I had no answers with which to generate such a document. I had to revoke the offer. I am taken by surprise that anyone would say I was given the necessary information!
BS again you just stated that you got your answer (outside of our forum) so you could have easily posted back with what you had found out and then provided documentation later. and you mean to tell me that you have not had time in the last six months to wing something together. shit you have practically written a novel here.
it is obvious to me that you just want to guard that knowledge and us it to flame and troll here. once you had the answers you were sure to come back and flame that thread and continue flaming on a regular basis. what an ass.
I've known you to be patient, sarah31 (and you are yet teaching me as I write), but when you say I'm taking great pains to insult someone - while I'm waiting months for forum responses and I'm reading internet documents that are obsolete and these are docs which talk about a different distro, refer to a different kernel, puts files in a different location????
yeah so you waited for an answer and didn't get one...it happens. you stated that barely anyone knew the answer. fianlly you got one and then came back and rudely blamed us for poor documentation and a barrel of other things. nice guy.
all i saw was orelein answer you in a nice and proper fashion and you called him eliteist. you also were rather rude about judd in your first post in the future thread. so yes i see all throughout attempts to belittle and brate and not one instance of sober commentary from you.
and here you are again balming us for online docs that are not ours.
That is not appropriate, ever, to assume that the newbie will not find older docs and will know enought to discard the incorrect ones.
this is not limited to newbies.....it can definitely be difficult finding what you need online.
And since most internet docs are coasting along since, for example, 1999 (re: the IPX/SPX how-to)
well if you are checking out and obscure problem that is actually now obsolete then sure the fucking doc will be old but you make is sound like ALL docs are old. so i have to assume that you are very much an idiot because i have found most documentation for most current issues to have current docs. most applications will upgrade their docs as they upgrade or do you even notice that? are you to self absorbed to go around and find out if your wild accusations actually have any merit?
once again, and I'll ask this, and directly of you, sarah31, why would any newbie assume that 4 year old document applied to their situation??
well knowing how many newbies are i would expect them to ask if docs are relevant. or they could possibly look into some of the information. if it was not producing answers...wow i think they would ask for help again. shit do you even pay attention to how newbies act on justlinux?
:oops: I'd ask that people remove useless web documents, but I fear that I'd get only 4 responses. That is reality, not sarcasm.
hmmm remove docs, add docs which is it? fyi arch removes most docs except in rare circumstances. if those docs are html they are html. if a n00b doesn't know how to view them i expect they would ask( that is if they are outside x).
dunbar...stick with slack because arch will never please you. slack is a very nice distro that should have the balance arch does not afford you. that is the great thing about a linux .... if you don't like one flavour then try another. just don't go back to the ice cream dealer and berate him for selling you your choice...get the point (if you don't then fine i expected that)

Repositories Management Suggestion

Arch has quickly become my (favorite) distribution, but I had not noticed until yesterday, that there are quite a few easily usable repositories besides the 2/3 official ones: "Trusted User Repos" as well as privately hosted repos of not (yet) trusted users.
I like this idea a lot and am amazed, how Pacman allows such flexibility. And as I consider Arch as a distribution with a lot of potential, I have thought about optimizing this (already great) repo system with the following goals:
· increase the number of packages available to Pacman
· encourage users to contribute to the community by providing packages instead of just "configure, make, make install"ing.
· reducing the administrational work for the user submission of packages (kind of automation of the user submitted packages, enhanced TUR system) and thus give the main developers more time for important things
· still providing a good quality assurance of the packages in the TURs and of course in the official repos
Thus I suggest the following enhancements:
· There should be three quality levels: Official Repos, TUR (Trusted User Repos), OUR (Open User Repos) -> nothing new
· Everybody who wants should be able to sign up (e.g. with his forum login) for an OUR at some central package management interface (like an enhanced packages.php on archlinux.org). She/He would have to provide own hosting. His repo (repo.db.tar.gz) gets scanned regularly to be included in the packages.php interface and a package voting facility is added to packages.php, so that all registered users (e.g. of the forum) can vote about this OUR.
· As somebody has votes above a certain number and quality level, he gets promoted (fairly automatically) to the TUR level and gets hosting on the official server. Setting it up like this takes stability of the packages into account as well as demand for them.
· With every new Pacman release the following repo lists will download: current, extra, release, unstable, TUR, OUR. But in pacman.conf only the official ones are enabled by default. This gives every user the stability and security of the current Pacman plus the possibility to easily use either the TUR-quality packages or even the OUR-quality packages.
If these suggestions sound good to the Arch community, I would offer to work on the necessary php/sql (?), of course closely cooperating with the devs. If you want this to be done in any other programming/scripting language, I am sorry that I can't help because of too little experience.
Your thoughts?
Edit: I just (grr... now that I have written this already) found a post saying that Eric (?) is working on a new repository management. So that's great news... is there any more information available? Maybe he can use one of my ideas as well.

just a couple of observations:
hugelmopf wrote:
I have thought about optimizing this (already great) repo system with the following goals:
· increase the number of packages available to Pacman
· encourage users to contribute to the community by providing packages instead of just "configure, make, make install"ing.
· reducing the administrational work for the user submission of packages (kind of automation of the user submitted packages, enhanced TUR system) and thus give the main developers more time for important things
· still providing a good quality assurance of the packages in the TURs and of course in the official repos
to the first point ..... i have never thought that there were too few packages. Whe i installed arch there were only about 300 packages and never found that limiting. I look at something like Debian and think that there is a distro that has become burdened with too many packages and "flexibility" of the developers to offer not only so many packages but variations of packages. Think of how long it takes Debian to release a new version and you get the idea.
You also need more developers and it is REALLY HARD to find good developers Arch has had too many "developers" with "eyes bigger than their stomachs".
to point two .... when i read that people are not using ABS to build their own packages i get frustrated. the whole reason of having a good package management system is to have user use it for making packages and not just for installing/uninstalling packages.
to point three .... i think having easy and not well monitored access to user contributed packages is stupid an dangerous. sorry to be harsh but for every tom dick and harry to have access to the package repos is signing a death warrant for arch. it is an incredible security risk.
to point four ... worrying about TURs when there are not even a public statement on what one needs to be a TUR or even an Arch developer is a liitle silly i think.
hugelmopf wrote:
Thus I suggest the following enhancements:
· There should be three quality levels: Official Repos, TUR (Trusted User Repos), OUR (Open User Repos) -> nothing new
· Everybody who wants should be able to sign up (e.g. with his forum login) for an OUR at some central package management interface (like an enhanced packages.php on archlinux.org). She/He would have to provide own hosting. His repo (repo.db.tar.gz) gets scanned regularly to be included in the packages.php interface and a package voting facility is added to packages.php, so that all registered users (e.g. of the forum) can vote about this OUR.
· As somebody has votes above a certain number and quality level, he gets promoted (fairly automatically) to the TUR level and gets hosting on the official server. Setting it up like this takes stability of the packages into account as well as demand for them.
· With every new Pacman release the following repo lists will download: current, extra, release, unstable, TUR, OUR. But in pacman.conf only the official ones are enabled by default. This gives every user the stability and security of the current Pacman plus the possibility to easily use either the TUR-quality packages or even the OUR-quality packages.
If these suggestions sound good to the Arch community, I would offer to work on the necessary php/sql (?), of course closely cooperating with the devs. If you want this to be done in any other programming/scripting language, I am sorry that I can't help because of too little experience.
Your thoughts?
Edit: I just (grr... now that I have written this already) found a post saying that Eric (?) is working on a new repository management. So that's great news... is there any more information available? Maybe he can use one of my ideas as well.
well as you know AUR is being worked on. As I mentione dabove i think even AURs will require constant monitoring and administrating because a freely accessable system is just too dangerous. I think that having user contributions is extremely important but all contributions HAVE to be secure and only monitoring such submissions is very very important.
personally I do not use unstable, TURs or Staging and will not use any similar repos. I only use current and extra because i "expect" that those packages have been scrutinised enough (though this is not always true). as well, i don't like all sorts of extra crud in my files. i like arch because it's conf. files are not cluttered up with a bunch of stuff i don't want and having several repos i have no interest in falls in the cruft catagory for me. I am sure others have that view.
voting .... i don't agree with voting to include packages in official repos or URs if a package is built and contributed then SOMEBODY thinks it is necessary and as such every effort should be made to include it, eventually, in the official repos. there are alot of excellent applications out there that are not well used but every bit as good as popular counterparts. In fact when i was a package maintainer i added a bunch of packages that alot of people probably would not have even have thought of building or using but like. They may not be wildly popular but in the end they helped draw people or keep people with arch.
i hope i did not come off too harsh. i think most of your ideas are already planned to be a part of the new AUR. i just wanted to offer some concerns that you may not have considered. as you will notice many people will question qulity control throughout the year (me included) and having a loose user contribution system certainly does not help to dispell such complaints.

I can't edit the page, because somebody else is logged in

I recently had to purcahse a new contribute package and link it up to the same website that we update. However, the original person who used the existing contribute has now moved overseas, and it says at the top:
'You cant edit this page because XXXX is currently editing it. Please contact XXXX for assistance.
can anyone please advise on how to deal with this sittuation.

I had the same sort of problem but there was never anyone else entitled to edit the site - all that happened is that I upgraded from Contribute 3.11 to Contribute CS4 and since that time I cannot edit a previously edited page as the draft cannot be saved due to a lock file problem.
I have deleted the one and only .LCK file from my site - but it was for a different page anyway and of course made no difference.
I was administrator. I am still administrator.
I suspect a silly conflict between residual Contribute 3.11 files and new CS4 files but of course the documentation assumes that everything is hunky dory and doesn't help much.
Any thoughts appreciated - any directories that I can just delete to start again without impacting my content?
Best Regards
Ian

Important Incoming Note

In order to keep incoming "clean" please be sure that when you submit a package that you follow the "contributing packages" post. namely you create a directory with the name of the package you are contributing then place the filelist, PKGBUILD, and finished package inside this directory. then bzip or gzip it into a tarball. Be sure that you DO NOT name it in a standard arch package format (ie <pkgname>-<pkgversion>-<release>.pkg.tar.gz) as i will now remove ALL contributions with a .pkg.tar.gz suffix without notifying the contributor.
if you know that you contributed only a package and not anything else please read the contributing packages thread again to know what we package maintainers require from our users and resubmit your contributions. (I removed ALL .pkg.tar.gz tonight.)
also please do not upload any other file types without notifying, by email, one of the developers. I noticed a few portugese html documents that are in there that i do not mind being there but please notify our documentation developers as soon as possible so that i can remove the files. more often than not i consider all none tarballed packages to be warez and i will remove it.

Stick with the existing format as described in the official docs. If/when we make changes to the package submittal process, there will be a new set of guidelines documented.

Arch Incoming Register - database

<b>Arch Incoming Register</b> is open for all Archers to list user contributed packages. To manage and also to follow up packages to Trust User Repos. Here also Archers can check what other packages are available beside Current and Extra.
The database operates in a Wiki style where users can freely add, edit, move and remove package names. The packages are divided in categories, type of package, and name of the Trust User maintaining packages considering for final approval for Arch Linux official repo.
Its still in an experimental stage to have an idea if useful and will remain in my server until then.
http://bliss-solutions.org/archlinux/incoming/index.php

i3839 wrote:1) Post a message on the forum with the pkgbuild.
You can also post pkgbuilds to the tur-users mailing list.
i3839 wrote:2) Upload the package to the incomming ftp.
AFAIK this is only creating more mess now. Looks like incoming is ignored by most people now.
i3839 wrote:3) Register the package with AIR.
Theoretically it's possible to register only pkgbuild (without binary package) in AIR except for the last two options in its register form. They assume there is a binary package somewhere (type of package, name of trusted user - I mean "leave blank for incoming").
There are at least two sources of pkgbuilds and packages that are not on this list. First is the forum (only pkgbuild) or some other "private" webpage. Second is a "private" repo outside any of the official and unoffical repos (like phrakture or neotuli IIRC).
Adding these options would make the word "incoming" (in AIR) more separate from the arch ftp incoming directory. It would also make AIR a temporary solution for registering packages and pkgbuilds until the new official system is ready (with voting and all other things).

Is 'Contribute' included in the new Adobe cloud package?

Dear Adobe Community.
I have recently upgraded to Mac OS 10.8.2 (mountain lion) and can no longer use my 'CS4' Muti user licence.
Before I go ahead and repurchase a new 'Contribute' licence only - I checked the new Adobe Cloud package (as it seems value for money) and for the little I use Adobe Contribute, ideal for me. But I can't see the 'CT' logo (Contribute) as an available software item in the Adobe Cloud packages. Is it included in the package? If so where Or what has taken its place?
Regards
Jp

Hi Dominic,
Thank you for the reply.
Adobe (support) also just confirmed 'Contribute' is not included in the 'Adobe Cloud' package.
'Contribute' is still, a stand alone item.
Regards
Jp

Please help with Contribute issue- Adobe or anyone!

My issues are many- I don't know where to start. First, as a long-time Adobe customer, I can not believe how support has declined- I really miss my "support package" from the early 90's when I spoke with a person who really knew how to address my problems and/or questions. I am so tired of being outsourced to someone who has no idea how to address my problem- only to send me to "Document #8932023912 03" off of the Adobe website. I want to talk to someone who KNOWS and APPRECIATES this product, and who understands its internal behavior (like what I get when I call MAC SUPPORT). I will pay for it! I have invested thousands of dollars on Adobe software and am now at an unacceptable standstill.
My small business relies on the Adobe Creative Suite 4 and the Contribute program. Up until now, I have never had a complaint, especially after moving to Mac a few years ago. Troubles started after two things (still not sure what the culprit was) - installing Snow Leopard and installing a Wacom Bamboo tablet (on the same day- my bad). Well, Illustrator, Photoshop work just fine as well as my other non-Adobe programs. But I can't even open InDesign (will post this on the proper post) or Contribute. So Apple had me deduce that I needed to create a new User and try things there. I eventually migrated to this new user but still, I cannot use Contribute.
I have set permissions with the program and contents of the folder- in addition to my Contribute keys to no avail. I can't even open it. Nor can I open it in my Root user which at least lets me run In Design. I am at a total loss and I need to update a website for my client. PLEASE someone, I would so greatly appreciate any advice or instruction as to how to run Contribute on my new user. Or in my Root user. I just need to get it to open! Reinstall did nothing PLEASE HELP.
A special note to anyone from Adobe: I want to talk to someone via a support package-- NOT outsourced. Does this fee-based option exist? It doesn't seem to from the main support number. If someone can help direct me, I would appreciate the proper instruction to do so. I need to get my InDesign running again and I have already invested multiple hours, days with Adobe support with NO solution at all. This is unacceptable in my mind, especially for the moneys invested.
Thank you in advance... Aimee M.

I totally share your views on Adobe period. I loved Macromedia., they also answered all my questions, then Adobe had to buy them out! I called them today (sales Dept., that's where they answer rather quickly., of course), they explained the following: You can pay for a live person, but the prices differ in that they come in packages. In other words, you can pay a flat rate per hour for one-on-one OR pay for one-on-one tech support 5 times per month, and the amount of times per month vary from that point on., and so does the price! I'm baffled! They are HORRIBLE!! . Like yourself, am on a standstill ever since I've been stuck with not being able to publish my site with current edits and it gives me a message whereas my own company name is "currently editing the page," so it keeps kicking out. I've tried everything, including but not limited to the following: going to the library and checking out books to troubleshoot; going on Adobe pages for support as well the Help features on the software program., etc...I'm exhausted! ADOBE you guys need to reassess your Customer Care Support and your outsourcing business as well!!! YOU WILL LOOSE YOUR CUSTOMERS RATHER QUICKLY!!

How to use classes from different user defined Packages

well i made 2 packages... one containing employee class and realted matter and other contaning bankaccounts and bank related work... now how can i use them in an another.. i know about the import statement but still couldn't make it work.... now suppose iam makin a obejct of employee class and passing in name and salary and all in the constructor... now i want that when i create the bankaccount class then the name of the employee should be passed to the bankaccount class so that it can assigen a account no. .. now how do i do this as when i create a object of employee class its made at runtime.. and if i create a object of bankaccount.. how wil it take that name as before goin to bank account i should already have a list of emplyees and then this list should be worked upon by the backaccount class to assign the accountno.s
Hope my question was clear... would appriciate a explanation and guidance!!!

Thank you so much ... i was able to solve the problem... i passed the object in the constructor of the accounts class and it all worked out the way i wanned... thank you so much... it wasn't that difficult but the idea was just not clicking...this place is wonderful... everyone rocks!!! and so greatful about all the help.. please keep up the good work and even i will try to contribute as much as possible!!

How can I add a patch to an existing package?

I really want to add a patch to Archlinux klibc package.
http://git.debian.org/?p=kernel/klibc.g … 571d2c979d
http://repos.archlinux.org/viewvc.cgi/k … core-i686/
But the more I read about contributing, the more confusing it gets. Wiki first page would take me to AUR, but it looks like AUR is only for adding new packages. So I find out about ABS which is for creating a custom package, but what steps to take to get the changed package to replace the existing? And should I actually be doing it this way? Maybe there are tools to introduce git patches automatically? I really don't understand...
I realize this is a newbie problem, but the wiki organization is confusing to me, so if anyone would provide links to answer my questions I'd be very happy.

edgg wrote:what steps to take to get the changed package to replace the existing? And should I actually be doing it this way?
ABS is exactly how you want to do this.
* install and run abs as described in the wiki page
* copy the files in /var/abs/core/klibc to your build directory (I have a builds directory in my home directory)
* edit the PKGBUILD to add your patch (man PKGBUILD will help here)
* make the package with makepkg (there is a wiki page for makepkg)
* use pacman to install it: pacman -U klibc-blahblah.pkg.tar.gz
The process is shockingly easy. And the great thing is that, since you've installed the package with pacman, you can use pacman to remove it if you change your mind. There is also a way to keep pacman from upgrading it when you do pacman -Syu (see pacman.conf).
The process is also described here: http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/ABS … he_ABS_way

Contributing packages.

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for