Even if the script is the recommended way, shouldn't the package be designed so that it will track all of its files? Having a post install script that places files through your filesystem feels like a dirty hack at the best of times.
Regards, Justin Dray E: [email protected] M: 0433348284 On 05/08/2014 7:13 am, "Laurent Carlier" <[email protected]> wrote: > Le lundi 4 août 2014, 18:15:32 Christian Hesse a écrit : > > Hello everybody, > > > > following a lengthy discussion sublu just deleted my package > > virtualbox-extension-pack from AUR. This is what his package > > (virtualbox-ext-oracle) does: > > > > * Install an archive file. > > * Use install script to copy a number of files to /usr without pacman > > knowing about it. > > > > I think this is the wrong way, so I created my own package > > (virtualbox-extension-pack) that tries to get it right: > > > > * Just install the files required, "ready to use" for virtualbox. > > * No crappy install script required! > > > > My package had about 75 votes IIRC, probably there would have been more > if > > more people knew about the details. The discussing had a number of > comments > > that agreed about my opinion regarding installing/coping files to /usr > with > > pacman or the install script. > > > > Although I think it is wrong seblu is free to provide his package via > AUR. > > But is there any good reason mine is not allowed to reside there? > > I've checked both packages, then i've also checked virtualbox > documentation. > Documentation is available at http://www.virtualbox.org/manual/ > * Ch8.36. VBoxManage extpack * > <<The "extpack" command allows you to add or remove VirtualBox extension > packs, as described in Section 1.5, “Installing VirtualBox and extension > packs”.>> > In regards of VirtualBox docs, Seblu is installing extension pack the > proper > way. > > Your package isn't following upstream way to install extension package and > you > are not sure it will keep working, you are just lucky. > > Your package is only a duplicated package of seblu's one, only differing > on the > way to install extension pack files isn't a good reason enough. Seblu was > right > to remove your package, there was an explanation before suppressing, rules > were followed. > > Nothing more to say. > -- > Laurent Carlier > http://www.archlinux.org
