The point of having a privacy-as-default repository with less
maintenance workload is absolutely right for me.

What is the current status on this? Is there any help needed?
I could investigate, test or build packages.

Otherwise I can also look at today's [nonprism] packages and keep them
up-to-date.

bill-auger <[email protected]> schrieb am Sun, 15. Dec 19 21:50:
i like the idea of the name change - it is probably was never
meaningful to most people unless they read the wiki article
first - a concise name like 'privacy' would make its purpose much
more obvious

AFAIK the repo name itself could be changed arbitrarily; but
each of the packages also have ".nonprismN" in the 'pkgrel' - im
not sure why that is necessary (likewise for ".nonsystemdN") -
packages in [libre] and [pcr] do not end with ".libreN" or
".pcrN"

in my experience, `pacman -Syu` will not automatically upgrade a
newer version of some duplicated package if it is in a
lower-priority repo - it is absolutely necessary to have the
repos declared in pacman.conf in the expected order of priority
- so, it should be totally sane to drop the special descriptors
".nonprismN" and ".nonsystemdN" from the 'pkgver', and have the
same ".parabolaN", or ".parN" for all packages, right?

maybe im confused about that; but it is common when packaging
with libretools, that some package conflicts arise because some
package needs to be deleted from the local /repo, which
is shadowing the one in the public repos, because of its
priority in the chroot pacman.conf
_______________________________________________
Dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.parabola.nu/mailman/listinfo/dev

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
Dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.parabola.nu/mailman/listinfo/dev

Reply via email to