On 02-03-16 18:09, Tom Pitcher wrote:
Is this standardised convention? Happy to switch mine to compiling from source
if so.
On Sunday, 28 February 2016 16:13:36 GMT Jameson wrote:
On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 8:30 PM <[email protected]> wrote:
tjbp [1] filed a deletion request for shashlik-bin [2]:
This package already exists under "shashlik". Could do with a
shashlik-git package, however.
[1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/tjbp/
[2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/shashlik-bin/
If we remove my -bin package, shashlik should be renamed since it is built
from a binary package, and not source.
Thanks,
Jameson.
Yes, general convention is that packages built from source use "pure"
packagename .
Any packages using binaries should have a -bin suffix.
