On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 5:21 PM, Det <[email protected]> wrote: > I guess this is a good summary of all the talk in virtualbox-sun's comment > section[1]. > > The reality here is that virtualbox-bin[2] has evolved into something _at > least_ as good as virtualbox-sun.
> While it's true that -sun is the original one it's also the one with the > incorrect naming If i remember correctly first was virtualbox_bin[1] (which was renammed into virtualbox-bin last year). > Even if -sun was to stay here the "better" stuff in -bin would have to be > implemented there first before the removal and the renaming. I don't understand your sentence. Is there something missing in -bin that you need? I remind everyone is encouraged to use the version in the official repositories[2]. [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?O=0&K=virtualbox_bin [2] https://www.archlinux.org/packages/community/x86_64/virtualbox/ -- Sébastien Luttringer www.seblu.net
