Re: [aur-general] Critique my pkgbuild

2018-10-14 Thread Ethan Rakoff
Hello again,

It took me a while to have some time, but I believe I have fixed all of the 
issues that were pointed out to me, with some help from Scimmia and eschwartz. 
I think the package is in much more presentable shape, I have learned plenty, 
and I fixed a lot of naive mistakes. Thanks everyone for the help.

I would very much appreciate it if you would all take the time to read the 
latest PKGBUILD (from the git version of the package) pasted below and see if 
there is anything I missed. Thanks!

# Maintainer: Ethan Rakoff 

pkgname=threemawebqt-git
pkgver=r2.079de78
pkgrel=1
pkgdesc="Thin client for Threema Web, an E2E encrypted messaging app."
arch=('i686' 'x86_64')
url="https://github.com/ethanrakoff/${pkgname%-*};
license=('MIT')
depends=('qt5-base' 'qt5-webengine')
makedepends=('git')
source=("git+${url}")
md5sums=('SKIP')

pkgver() {
  cd "${pkgname%-*}"

  printf "r%s.%s" "$(git rev-list --count HEAD)" "$(git rev-parse --short 
HEAD)" 

}

build() {
  cd "${pkgname%-*}"

  qmake "PREFIX=/usr"
  make
}

package() {
  cd "${pkgname%-*}"

  make INSTALL_ROOT="${pkgdir}" install 


  install -Dm644 LICENSE "${pkgdir}/usr/share/licenses/${pkgname%-*}/LICENSE"
}



Ethan Rakoff

Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email.

‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Wednesday, October 10, 2018 2:32 PM, Eli Schwartz via aur-general 
 wrote:

> On 10/10/18 9:34 AM, Ethan Rakoff wrote:
> 

> > I have submitted a package called threemawebqt to the aur (mostly for
> > me, and some friends who use arch). It is a VERY simple thin client for
> > a webapp using Qt. This is my first pkgbuild from scratch (and my first
> > time working with Qt) so even though it is a super simple one, I would
> > like some others to look at it and let me know what I'm doing wrong.
> > Thanks!
> > Here is the pkgbuild for easy reading:
> > 

> > Maintainer: Ethan Rakoff et...@ethanrakoff.com
> > 

> > ===
> > 

> > pkgname=threemawebqt
> > pkgver=0.1
> > pkgrel=1
> > pkgdesc="Thin client for Threema Web, the web client for Threema, an E2E
> > encrypted messaging app."
> 

> That's a rather lengthy pkgdesc, what about:
> "thin client for the Threema Web E2E encrypted messaging app"
> 

> > arch=('i686' 'x86_64')
> > url="https://github.com/ethanrakoff/${pkgname};
> > license=('MIT')
> > depends=('qt5-base' 'qt5-webengine')
> > makedepends=('make')
> 

> You specified "make" as a dependency, which is already in base-devel,
> but not "git", which you need to download sources.
> 

> Protip: you can catch issues like this (where your
> coincidentally-installed programs are actually needed to build) by
> checking that your package still builds in a clean chroot using the
> mkarchroot and makechrootpkg commands from [extra]/devtools. Or use the
> extra-x86_64-build convenience wrapper.
> 

> > source=("git+${url}")
> 

> I like it when people use variables just because they exist, so keep up
> the good work!
> 

> Also this underlines the association between the url and the source
> download.
> 

> > md5sums=('SKIP')
> > build() {
> >   cd "${pkgname}/src"
> > qmake
> >   make
> > }
> > package() {
> >   cd "${srcdir}/${pkgname}/src"
> >   make INSTALL_ROOT="${pkgdir}" install
> > install -Dm644 icon.png "${pkgdir}/usr/share/icons/${pkgname}/icon.png"
> >   install -Dm644 ../threemawebqt.desktop
> > "${pkgdir}/usr/share/applications/threemawebqt.desktop"
> >   install -Dm644 ../LICENSE
> > "${pkgdir}/usr/share/licenses/${pkgname}/LICENSE"
> > }
> 

> Since you're the upstream developer, you have the opportunity to fix
> your qmake configuration.
> 

> It doesn't respect any sort of --prefix option, but hardcodes
> /usr/local/bin/ as the install location. You can have this determined at
> qmake time using e.g.
> https://stackoverflow.com/questions/7106442/qt-project-files-and-prefix-variable/7106823#7106823
> 

> It should not require one to install the desktop file and icon by hand,
> but add these as additional "thing.files".
> 

> The license file is not required to run, and distributions often have
> different ideas about where to install it for distribution packages...
> so you don't need to install it too.
> 

> ...
> 

> Correspondingly, the desktop file should not hardcode the Exec path, but
> rely on it being in the system $PATH. Likewise, the Icon should not be
> /usr/share/icons/threemawebqt/icon.png but instead "threemawebqt", and
> you should install icon.png as "threemawebqt.png" to a directory that
> obeys the XDG icon theme specification:
> https://standards.freedesktop.org/icon-theme-spec/icon-theme-spec-latest.html#directory_layout
> 

> e.g. /usr/share/pixmaps/ or /usr/share/icons/hicolor/128x128/apps/
> 

> ...
> 

> Also your *_DIR setup uses the parent directory but assumes that it is
> run from the src/ folder, look what happens if you try to run
> 

> cd /tmp
> git clone https://github.com/ethanrakoff/threemawebqt /tmp/threemawebqt
> cd /tmp/threemawebqt
> qmake 

Re: [aur-general] TU Application: Daniel Bermond (dbermond)

2018-10-14 Thread Daniel Bermond via aur-general
On 10/14/18 7:36 PM, Doug Newgard via aur-general wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Oct 2018 18:35:53 -0300
> Daniel Bermond via aur-general  wrote:
>
>> I usually don't use pgp on my aur packages because people tend to
>> complain a lot about building issues. They fail to handle the keys and
>> start complaining to the packager, and this is a big stress. When
>> dealing with repository packages this is another story, of course. Since
>> this was raised as a main issue, I'll be adding the pgp checks back again.
>>
>> I know that we should not use msg2 because it's makepkg internal. But it
>> helps to diagnose user problems by helping to identify at which stage a
>> build error is happening. For sure I can remove it if required to. ;)
> You're not helping your case. The pgp issue has well been covered, so I'll 
> skip
> that for now.
>
> For msg2, the response that you know you're not supposed to use it but decided
> to anyway doesn't inspire confidence. printf or echo would have done the job
> just as well, but you used something you knew you weren't supposed to?

Ok, I'll not be using msg2 anymore from now on and will remove it from
packages.


>
> To clarify, as I originally said, your PKGBUILDs that I spot checked are
> generally good and I think you could make a good TU. You seem to be willing to
> work with people, and that's a good sign. There's just some things that make 
> me
> wonder if now is the time.
>
> Doug
I understand.

-- 
Best regards,
Daniel Bermond




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: [aur-general] TU Application: Daniel Bermond (dbermond)

2018-10-14 Thread Daniel Bermond via aur-general

On 10/14/18 7:16 PM, Levente Polyak via aur-general wrote:
> On 10/14/18 11:35 PM, Daniel Bermond via aur-general wrote:
>> I usually don't use pgp on my aur packages because people tend to
>> complain a lot about building issues. They fail to handle the keys and
>> start complaining to the packager, and this is a big stress. When
>> dealing with repository packages this is another story, of course. Since
>> this was raised as a main issue, I'll be adding the pgp checks back again.
>>
> So let me summarize what you are saying, correct me if im wrong:
>
> You fully know whats all the gizzle with gpg. Instead of acting like a
> trustable user who follows best practice and spreads good advice and
> helps teaching people about how all this works properly you prefere to
> pull the lazy card because its what? big stress? Serious?
> I don't even find words to describe how untrustworthy this is to the
> community to prefer to remove GPG signatures instead of educating users?
>
> PS: Did you hear of pinned comments?
>
> WOW I'm speechless at best.
Sorry then. I'll be using gpg checks whenever it's available from now on.

-- 
Best regards,
Daniel Bermond




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: [aur-general] TU Application: Daniel Bermond (dbermond)

2018-10-14 Thread Daniel Bermond via aur-general

On 10/14/18 7:14 PM, Eli Schwartz via aur-general wrote:
> On 10/14/18 5:35 PM, Daniel Bermond via aur-general wrote:
>> I usually don't use pgp on my aur packages because people tend to
>> complain a lot about building issues. They fail to handle the keys and
>> start complaining to the packager, and this is a big stress. When
>> dealing with repository packages this is another story, of course. Since
>> this was raised as a main issue, I'll be adding the pgp checks back again.
> It's very simple to handle people who refuse to learn how the AUR works:
> refuse to acknowledge anything they say, and simply respond with "learn
> how to makepkg".
>
> Removing pgp checks in the general case is not okay, even if "it's just
> an AUR package, so no one cares about security because it's all garbage,
> right?"

Thanks for the suggestions. I'll use pgp whenever possible on aur
packages then.


>> I know that we should not use msg2 because it's makepkg internal. But it
>> helps to diagnose user problems by helping to identify at which stage a
>> build error is happening. For sure I can remove it if required to. ;)
> I've yet to come across a single justified case of using msg2, anyone
> who knows how to read an error message in the first place doesn't need
> this help.
>
> There's no rule against it per se, but I regard it as... messy.
> Especially in the example Doug indicated, it seems to be wildly
> overcomplicating the build and package functions.

Ok, I'll be removing msg2 from all my packages, or use printf/echo
instead like mentioned by Doug in his message.


-- 
Best regards,
Daniel Bermond




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: [aur-general] TU Application: Daniel Bermond (dbermond)

2018-10-14 Thread Daniel Bermond via aur-general
On 10/14/18 7:10 PM, Levente Polyak via aur-general wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
>
> On 10/14/18 9:49 PM, Daniel Bermond via aur-general wrote:
>> I have a project of my own called screencast[4], which is a command line 
>> interface to record a X11 desktop using FFmpeg, having support for offline 
>> recording, live streaming and the capability of adding some effects. It's 
>> written in pure POSIX/portable shellscript.
>
> Just took some seconds of reading screencast and i noticed the following
> that you may want to fix as i didn't spot in a 10sec lookup what would
> mitigate the following:
>
> https://github.com/dbermond/screencast/blob/HEAD/src/settings_general.sh#L31
>
> You are using /tmp here, you should replace processing with a safe user
> owned directory aquired by `mktemp`.
>
> The reason:
>
> Its vulnerable to symlink attacks, you can delete arbitrary user owned
> files via:
> https://github.com/dbermond/screencast/blob/HEAD/src/system.sh#L31
>
> Or steal secret data like ssh or gnipg secret keys by moving it outside
> of a user-only accessable folder via a `mv` gadget:
>
> https://github.com/dbermond/screencast/blob/HEAD/src/system.sh#L40
>
> cheers,
> Levente

Hi Levente,

Thank you for pointing this!

Although mktemp is not defined by the POSIX specification, it passes the
shellcheck POSIX test with /bin/sh. I think it will not defeat the POSIX
purpose of the script. Googling for it suggests that it's present
everywhere nowadays. I can check for it's presence on the system and use
it if available, otherwise fallback to the poor /tmp or something else.

I'll be implementing this as soon as I can, and also some Eli suggestions.

-- 
Best regards,
Daniel Bermond




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: [aur-general] TU Application: Daniel Bermond (dbermond)

2018-10-14 Thread Daniel Bermond via aur-general
On 10/14/18 7:06 PM, Eli Schwartz via aur-general wrote:
>
> That's a rather... intimidatingly complex Makefile, by the way. If I
> might ask, what is the purpose of splitting apart the source files then
> recombining them like this? It is slightly similar to how makepkg is
> developed, except we loop through and source a library in
> /usr/share/makepkg ...
>
> Carving apart the headers with sed and relying on the *order* they are
> combined, seems to be defeating the purpose at any rate.

The purpose is to have a single script as the final result, instead of
an executable with installed modules. And yes, using 'source' (the dot
command) was discarded by me during development, so a makefile with
split sources was the choice, being it complex or not. ;) Since the
final script is huge, this make it easier to use and distribute it (it's
just a single file), while making it possible to split the source code
into separated parts for easier maintenance in the future, specially if
the code keeps growing up. When having such a large script in a single
file, it keeps harder and harder to maintain/fix/improve the code, so I
decided to make this way.


>
> ...
>
> The Makefile specifies various targets using e.g. PREFIX := /usr/local,
> surely you meant to use ?= for this? BCOMPDIR should properly be derived
> from $(shell pkg-config bash-completion --variable completionsdir)

Thanks for the suggestions. :)


>
> Your other loops here and there could take advantage of *not* being
> loops, like for make clean, just using rm's builtin -v to print the
> files being removed.

Make clean just erases a single file (screencast) if it is present,
without looping. Even if it was looping, in this way a get a
personalized output message instead of the standard rm message, which I
like ;). And this is not a critical part to worry about loops :)


> I also find it rather odd that you take pains to single-quote your
> static strings in sh snippets like [ -f '$(NAME)' ] and [ -d
> './test/output' ]

I like to quote things in shell code (the part you mentioned are shell
ones). That's just my personal approach. You can see this on the .sh
sources too.


> But, you don't quote things that need quoting, like:
> install -Dm755  ... '$(DESTDIR)'...
>
> (Because DESTDIR can have spaces depending on the makepkg BUILDDIR,
> hence why we always quote "$srcdir" and "$pkgdir", at least until the
> Makefile mangles it for us.)

Ah yes, forgot it there. Thanks for pointing this out! :)


>
> Don't feel bad though, you're nowhere near the only offender at this --
> GNU autotools does it too, so most Makefiles in the world have this issue.

I also see this out there ;)


>
> You probably should not be opinionated in your Makefile, about gzipping
> the manpage. Packaging tools like makepkg already do this (and maybe
> make it configurable). I would say it breaks reproducible builds, but
> you did add the -n flag so at least that is alright.

The purpose of this makefile was to present the regular user with a
proper and well suited installation. If you check the readme it has an
installation section with very basic instructions. Being such, for the
regular user perspective it's better to install a gzipped manpage.
Packagers can modify this at their will.


>
>> I would like to bring the following packages into [community]: -
>> advancecomp
> Too late -- I said I would do that back in my TU application:
> https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2017-December/033719.html
>
> And you've reminded me to do so. :p
>
Oh sorry, I missed you saying this about advancecomp :)


-- 
Best regards,
Daniel Bermond




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: [aur-general] TU Application: Daniel Bermond (dbermond)

2018-10-14 Thread Daniel Bermond via aur-general
On 10/14/18 6:12 PM, Baptiste Jonglez wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 14-10-18, Daniel Bermond via aur-general wrote:
>> My name is Daniel Bermond and my alias on the AUR and forums is
>> dbermond[1][3].
>>
>> Bruno Pagani (alias: ArchangeGabriel) is sponsoring my Trusted User 
>> application. I would like to highly thank Bruno for accepting to be my 
>> sponsor.
> Welcome here!
Thank you! :)
>
> I see that you maintain a fair number of useful and popular packages,
> thanks for the work it represents.
>
> I had a look at some of your packages (including the ones you mention
> below), and they are in pretty good shape.
Thanks again. I'm trying my best to give good packages to aur users.
>> I would like to bring the following packages into [community]:
>> - advancecomp
>> - kvazaar
>> - intel-media-sdk
>> - libmysofa
>> - openh264
>> - shine
>> - vmaf
> Out of curiosity, do you plan to only bring these 7 packages to
> [community], or is it just a highlight?  Out of those 7, only 4 are
> currently maintained by you (unless I'm being tricked by the new
> co-maintainer feature), and they are not the most popular packages you
> have.
>
> Baptiste
That package list was an initial one and I can bring more packages
later. But please note that a significant amount of my packages are
either development ones (-git, -hg, etc) or modified packages that
already exist on the repos, and those ones are not eligible for
[community]. I think the following packages are another good ones to
bring into [community], and I'm maintaining:

- firetools
- fs-uae
- fs-uae-launcher
- htmldoc
- laptop-mode-tools
- libemf
- libilbc
- mujs

-- 

Best regards,
Daniel Bermond




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: [aur-general] TU Application - Konstantin Gizdov

2018-10-14 Thread Konstantin Gizdov
On 14/10/2018 23:24, Levente Polyak via aur-general wrote:
> Hey Konstantin,
>
>
> On 10/14/18 11:41 PM, Konstantin Gizdov wrote:
   o llvm50
   o llvm50-libs
   o clang50
> Didn't dig into it myself as its easier to ask, could you maybe
> elaborate why we would need those 50 versioned variants? Normally we try
> to keep the number of versioned variants to the very minimum and only
> throw them in as a last resort because of mayor incompatibilities :)
>
> cheers,
> Levente
>
Yeah, I know. This is from way back and a core issue. As it stands now,
ROOT requires a custom patched version of Clang 5.x.x to build it's
Cling interpreter. A year ago, it couldn't even build against an
external LLVM. I've been pushing for some patches upstream to make LLVM
external. For the moment, ROOT still requires a built-in build of Clang
5.0, but that obviously does not include all latest fixes upstream. So
moving to LLVM 5.0.2 external and pushing for more changes to support
Clang external too will correct that. And the next step will be to more
to more recent LLVM stack versions.

Regards,

Konstantin




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: [aur-general] TU Application: Daniel Bermond (dbermond)

2018-10-14 Thread Doug Newgard via aur-general
On Sun, 14 Oct 2018 18:35:53 -0300
Daniel Bermond via aur-general  wrote:

> I usually don't use pgp on my aur packages because people tend to
> complain a lot about building issues. They fail to handle the keys and
> start complaining to the packager, and this is a big stress. When
> dealing with repository packages this is another story, of course. Since
> this was raised as a main issue, I'll be adding the pgp checks back again.
> 
> I know that we should not use msg2 because it's makepkg internal. But it
> helps to diagnose user problems by helping to identify at which stage a
> build error is happening. For sure I can remove it if required to. ;)

You're not helping your case. The pgp issue has well been covered, so I'll skip
that for now.

For msg2, the response that you know you're not supposed to use it but decided
to anyway doesn't inspire confidence. printf or echo would have done the job
just as well, but you used something you knew you weren't supposed to?

To clarify, as I originally said, your PKGBUILDs that I spot checked are
generally good and I think you could make a good TU. You seem to be willing to
work with people, and that's a good sign. There's just some things that make me
wonder if now is the time.

Doug


pgpZqnEYvOlHw.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: [aur-general] TU Application: Daniel Bermond (dbermond)

2018-10-14 Thread Levente Polyak via aur-general
On 10/15/18 12:27 AM, Baptiste Jonglez wrote:
> On 15-10-18, Levente Polyak via aur-general wrote:
>> On 10/14/18 11:35 PM, Daniel Bermond via aur-general wrote:
>>>
>>> I usually don't use pgp on my aur packages because people tend to
>>> complain a lot about building issues. They fail to handle the keys and
>>> start complaining to the packager, and this is a big stress. When
>>> dealing with repository packages this is another story, of course. Since
>>> this was raised as a main issue, I'll be adding the pgp checks back again.
>>>
>>
>> So let me summarize what you are saying, correct me if im wrong:
>>
>> You fully know whats all the gizzle with gpg. Instead of acting like a
>> trustable user who follows best practice and spreads good advice and
>> helps teaching people about how all this works properly you prefere to
>> pull the lazy card because its what? big stress? Serious?
>> I don't even find words to describe how untrustworthy this is to the
>> community to prefer to remove GPG signatures instead of educating users?
> 
> What a warm way to welcome people.  A bit of fact-checking doesn't hurt:
> 
> $ pkgver=4.16.1
> $ wget 
> "https://www.apache.org/dist/flex/${pkgver}/binaries/apache-flex-sdk-${pkgver}-bin.tar.gz"{,.asc}
> $ gpg --verify apache-flex-sdk-4.16.1-bin.tar.gz.asc 
> gpg: assuming signed data in 'apache-flex-sdk-4.16.1-bin.tar.gz'
> gpg: Signature made mer. 15 nov. 2017 09:44:37 CET
> gpg:using RSA key 44998F3E242727E94C4BADEB6B0A7EC905061FC8
> gpg: Can't check signature: No public key
> 
> $ gpg --search-keys 44998F3E242727E94C4BADEB6B0A7EC905061FC8
> gpg: data source: http://192.146.137.99:11371
> (1)  Piotr Zarzycki (CODE SIGNING KEY) 
>4096 bit RSA key 6B0A7EC905061FC8, created: 2017-06-17 (revoked)
> Keys 1-1 of 1 for "44998F3E242727E94C4BADEB6B0A7EC905061FC8".  Enter 
> number(s), N)ext, or Q)uit > 
> 
> 
> Baptiste
> 

Fact checkin what? I didn't respond to a specific case, I responded to a
general statement:

"I usually don't use pgp on my aur packages because people tend to
complain a lot about building issues."

And that statement applies to parts of your comment as well... no I
frankly don't understand that someone would not like to because its
stress. We then better add base-devel to makedepends as well, right?



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: [aur-general] TU Application: Daniel Bermond (dbermond)

2018-10-14 Thread Baptiste Jonglez
On 15-10-18, Levente Polyak via aur-general wrote:
> On 10/14/18 11:35 PM, Daniel Bermond via aur-general wrote:
> >
> > I usually don't use pgp on my aur packages because people tend to
> > complain a lot about building issues. They fail to handle the keys and
> > start complaining to the packager, and this is a big stress. When
> > dealing with repository packages this is another story, of course. Since
> > this was raised as a main issue, I'll be adding the pgp checks back again.
> > 
> 
> So let me summarize what you are saying, correct me if im wrong:
> 
> You fully know whats all the gizzle with gpg. Instead of acting like a
> trustable user who follows best practice and spreads good advice and
> helps teaching people about how all this works properly you prefere to
> pull the lazy card because its what? big stress? Serious?
> I don't even find words to describe how untrustworthy this is to the
> community to prefer to remove GPG signatures instead of educating users?

What a warm way to welcome people.  A bit of fact-checking doesn't hurt:

$ pkgver=4.16.1
$ wget 
"https://www.apache.org/dist/flex/${pkgver}/binaries/apache-flex-sdk-${pkgver}-bin.tar.gz"{,.asc}
$ gpg --verify apache-flex-sdk-4.16.1-bin.tar.gz.asc 
gpg: assuming signed data in 'apache-flex-sdk-4.16.1-bin.tar.gz'
gpg: Signature made mer. 15 nov. 2017 09:44:37 CET
gpg:using RSA key 44998F3E242727E94C4BADEB6B0A7EC905061FC8
gpg: Can't check signature: No public key

$ gpg --search-keys 44998F3E242727E94C4BADEB6B0A7EC905061FC8
gpg: data source: http://192.146.137.99:11371
(1)  Piotr Zarzycki (CODE SIGNING KEY) 
   4096 bit RSA key 6B0A7EC905061FC8, created: 2017-06-17 (revoked)
Keys 1-1 of 1 for "44998F3E242727E94C4BADEB6B0A7EC905061FC8".  Enter number(s), 
N)ext, or Q)uit > 


Baptiste


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Re: [aur-general] TU Application - Konstantin Gizdov

2018-10-14 Thread Levente Polyak via aur-general
Hey Konstantin,


On 10/14/18 11:41 PM, Konstantin Gizdov wrote:
>>>   o llvm50
>>>   o llvm50-libs
>>>   o clang50

Didn't dig into it myself as its easier to ask, could you maybe
elaborate why we would need those 50 versioned variants? Normally we try
to keep the number of versioned variants to the very minimum and only
throw them in as a last resort because of mayor incompatibilities :)

cheers,
Levente



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: [aur-general] TU Application - Konstantin Gizdov

2018-10-14 Thread Levente Polyak via aur-general
On 10/14/18 11:41 PM, Konstantin Gizdov wrote:
> Sure, I can share the load. I've built tensorflow+cuda from scratch a
> couple of times and completely understand the struggle. :)
> 

Reminder to always bottom-post on Arch mailinglists ;)



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: [aur-general] TU Application: Daniel Bermond (dbermond)

2018-10-14 Thread Levente Polyak via aur-general
On 10/14/18 11:35 PM, Daniel Bermond via aur-general wrote:
>
> I usually don't use pgp on my aur packages because people tend to
> complain a lot about building issues. They fail to handle the keys and
> start complaining to the packager, and this is a big stress. When
> dealing with repository packages this is another story, of course. Since
> this was raised as a main issue, I'll be adding the pgp checks back again.
> 

So let me summarize what you are saying, correct me if im wrong:

You fully know whats all the gizzle with gpg. Instead of acting like a
trustable user who follows best practice and spreads good advice and
helps teaching people about how all this works properly you prefere to
pull the lazy card because its what? big stress? Serious?
I don't even find words to describe how untrustworthy this is to the
community to prefer to remove GPG signatures instead of educating users?

PS: Did you hear of pinned comments?

WOW I'm speechless at best.



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: [aur-general] TU Application: Daniel Bermond (dbermond)

2018-10-14 Thread Eli Schwartz via aur-general
On 10/14/18 5:35 PM, Daniel Bermond via aur-general wrote:
> I usually don't use pgp on my aur packages because people tend to
> complain a lot about building issues. They fail to handle the keys and
> start complaining to the packager, and this is a big stress. When
> dealing with repository packages this is another story, of course. Since
> this was raised as a main issue, I'll be adding the pgp checks back again.

It's very simple to handle people who refuse to learn how the AUR works:
refuse to acknowledge anything they say, and simply respond with "learn
how to makepkg".

Removing pgp checks in the general case is not okay, even if "it's just
an AUR package, so no one cares about security because it's all garbage,
right?"

> I know that we should not use msg2 because it's makepkg internal. But it
> helps to diagnose user problems by helping to identify at which stage a
> build error is happening. For sure I can remove it if required to. ;)

I've yet to come across a single justified case of using msg2, anyone
who knows how to read an error message in the first place doesn't need
this help.

There's no rule against it per se, but I regard it as... messy.
Especially in the example Doug indicated, it seems to be wildly
overcomplicating the build and package functions.

-- 
Eli Schwartz
Bug Wrangler and Trusted User



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: [aur-general] TU Application: Daniel Bermond (dbermond)

2018-10-14 Thread Levente Polyak via aur-general
Hi Daniel,

On 10/14/18 9:49 PM, Daniel Bermond via aur-general wrote:
> I have a project of my own called screencast[4], which is a command line 
> interface to record a X11 desktop using FFmpeg, having support for offline 
> recording, live streaming and the capability of adding some effects. It's 
> written in pure POSIX/portable shellscript.


Just took some seconds of reading screencast and i noticed the following
that you may want to fix as i didn't spot in a 10sec lookup what would
mitigate the following:

https://github.com/dbermond/screencast/blob/HEAD/src/settings_general.sh#L31

You are using /tmp here, you should replace processing with a safe user
owned directory aquired by `mktemp`.

The reason:

Its vulnerable to symlink attacks, you can delete arbitrary user owned
files via:
https://github.com/dbermond/screencast/blob/HEAD/src/system.sh#L31

Or steal secret data like ssh or gnipg secret keys by moving it outside
of a user-only accessable folder via a `mv` gadget:

https://github.com/dbermond/screencast/blob/HEAD/src/system.sh#L40

cheers,
Levente



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: [aur-general] TU Application: Daniel Bermond (dbermond)

2018-10-14 Thread Eli Schwartz via aur-general
On 10/14/18 3:49 PM, Daniel Bermond via aur-general wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> My name is Daniel Bermond and my alias on the AUR and forums is 
> dbermond[1][3].
> 
> Bruno Pagani (alias: ArchangeGabriel) is sponsoring my Trusted User
> application. I would like to highly thank Bruno for accepting to be
> my sponsor.
> 
> I'm a Brazilian doctor (physician). Yes, my job and profession are
> not related to the computing world, but since childhood I'm an
> enthusiast of the computing and software world. I've beeing using
> Linux since many years ago, and it's difficult to tell when I
> started, but it has been a long time. By searching in the middle of
> some old things here I could find some old Ubuntu CD-ROMs of the 7.04
> (2007) version from the time they still shipped free disks worldwide,
> so I can for sure say that I have 11 years of Linux usage at minimum.
> But my initial Linux usage starts even before this, with some old
> RedHat distribution that didn't run very well on my poor graphics
> card, at a time that I cannot tell precisely. For many years I did
> the famous distro-hopping and have used many major distributions:
> openSUSE, Fedora, Mandrake/Mandriva (when they still existed),
> PCLinuxOS, Ubuntu and variants, Mint and probably others.
> 
> I have started to use Arch in 2015. At that time I was at Linux Mint
> and feel the need for something better and different. I found myself
> in need of more recent software, being disappointed with the
> Mint/Ubuntu outdated ones. I was also very tired to reinstall the
> system every one (or two) year(s). When Mint went for shipping
> LTS-only releases, I decided that a rolling release distribution
> should be my new place. By already having many years of Linux usage
> and experience in the background, Arch was everything that I was
> looking for. Added the fact of being able to fully customize my
> system by building packages that could be easily integrated in the
> system with pacman.
> 
> After felling confident with Arch itself, I've started to contribute
> packages to the AUR. I can perfectly remember my first one:
> ffmpeg-full-git. It was, and still is, a pleasure to maintain it,
> firstly because I was in need for it, and, secondly, because I was
> contributing back to the community something that was useful for me.
> Things evolved quickly, I started to maintain more and more packages
> that I was also in need for, while adopting other orphaned ones, and
> currently I'm the maintainer of 170+ packages[2].

$ package-query -As --maintainer dbermond -f %b | sort -u| wc -l
171

*tries to think how he'll manage to review all these*

> Some of the packages that I maintained were already brought into the
> official repositories: - ffnvcodec-headers - intel-gmmlib (formerly
> named gmmlib on the AUR, adopted by my sponsor Bruno) -
> intel-media-driver (adopted by my sponsor Bruno Pagani) - libraqm -
> nccl - pybind11* (TU Santiago announced me that he will bring it into
> [community])
> 
> Among the years, I've studied C, x86 assembly, Python and
> shellscript. I'm trying to add C++ to the list, already started it,
> but still need to find more time to dedicate to it. I've made some
> contributions to the open source world. I have a project of my own
> called screencast[4], which is a command line interface to record a
> X11 desktop using FFmpeg, having support for offline recording, live
> streaming and the capability of adding some effects. It's written in
> pure POSIX/portable shellscript.

That's a rather... intimidatingly complex Makefile, by the way. If I
might ask, what is the purpose of splitting apart the source files then
recombining them like this? It is slightly similar to how makepkg is
developed, except we loop through and source a library in
/usr/share/makepkg ...

Carving apart the headers with sed and relying on the *order* they are
combined, seems to be defeating the purpose at any rate.

...

The Makefile specifies various targets using e.g. PREFIX := /usr/local,
surely you meant to use ?= for this? BCOMPDIR should properly be derived
from $(shell pkg-config bash-completion --variable completionsdir)

Your other loops here and there could take advantage of *not* being
loops, like for make clean, just using rm's builtin -v to print the
files being removed.

I also find it rather odd that you take pains to single-quote your
static strings in sh snippets like [ -f '$(NAME)' ] and [ -d
'./test/output' ]
But, you don't quote things that need quoting, like:
install -Dm755  ... '$(DESTDIR)'...

(Because DESTDIR can have spaces depending on the makepkg BUILDDIR,
hence why we always quote "$srcdir" and "$pkgdir", at least until the
Makefile mangles it for us.)

Don't feel bad though, you're nowhere near the only offender at this --
GNU autotools does it too, so most Makefiles in the world have this issue.

You probably should not be opinionated in your Makefile, about gzipping
the manpage. Packaging tools like makepkg already do this (and maybe
make 

Re: [aur-general] TU Application: Daniel Bermond (dbermond)

2018-10-14 Thread Doug Newgard via aur-general
On Sun, 14 Oct 2018 23:38:54 +0200
Baptiste Jonglez  wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> On 14-10-18, Doug Newgard via aur-general wrote:
> > Decided to take a quick look at your PKGBUILDs, and just a few spot checks
> > makes me wonder. The first one I click on is apache-flex-sdk, I see that you
> > aren't the original submitter, so I look at the git log and see that the 
> > first
> > thing you did when taking over this was to remove pgp checks from the 
> > source.
> > WTF. Look at the PKGBUILD, see a totally useless prepare function, ok, not a
> > big thing. Let's check another one, clicked on flif, see msg2s being used 
> > for
> > no reason and bad conflicts. Click on a couple more, see that those issues
> > aren't mistakes, they're a fundamental misunderstanding.
> > 
> > Maybe my perception was colored by that really bad decision to remove the 
> > pgp
> > checks, and while the PKGBUILDs are mostly fine, there seems to be things 
> > about
> > packaging that you don't understand yet. Is it time to become a TU already? 
> >  
> 
> Well, as always, you could start by not being immediately aggressive
> towards people.

Please read my email again, it was not aggressive in any way. My response to
your candidate would be aggressive, I'm still deciding if I want to actually
send that.

> 
> Judging from the handful of PKGBUILDs I've read, the quality is really
> high overall, they don't even have most of the "classical" small mistakes
> (there is source renaming when needed, etc).  We don't require new TUs to
> do everything perfectly, and nothing is ever perfect anyway.  There's
> always something new to learn.

I'm not talking about expecting perfection, I'm seeing consistent issues that
point to a possible misunderstanding on how packaging is handled. That is a
cause for concern and worth being brought up.

> 
> Regarding the PGP checks, there is no question that they are very useful
> and desirable for packages in our repositories.  I am sure that Daniel
> will make efforts to add PGP checks wherever possible when he moves
> packages to [community].  But for the AUR, the situation is a bit
> different (in my opinion) because I know it throws some people off when
> they don't know that they have to import a PGP key to build the package.
> I tend to include them anyway now, but I would understand that somebody
> would like not to.

The situation in the AUR is no different at all. Downgrading PKGBUILDs to
appease users who don't want to learn anything is is a serious problem and is a
cause for grave concerns.

> 
> Anyway, for the specific case of apache-flex-sdk, look at the comments:
> the signing key simply seemed to have expired.
> 
> Baptiste


pgpjvhAnzG3Ge.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: [aur-general] TU Application - Konstantin Gizdov

2018-10-14 Thread Konstantin Gizdov
Sure, I can share the load. I've built tensorflow+cuda from scratch a
couple of times and completely understand the struggle. :)

On 14/10/2018 22:31, Sven-Hendrik Haase wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 14, 2018, 22:34 Konstantin Gizdov  wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I am Konstantin Gizdov [1] [2],
>> (`kgizdov`, `a...@kge.pw`, `kgiz...@gmail.com`)
>>
>> I would like to apply to be a Trusted User under Baptiste Jonglez's
>> sponsorship.
>>
>> A few words about me:
>>
>> I am currently a Particle Physics PhD at Univerisity of Edinburgh and I
>> have used Linux since my early teenage years. After I finished
>> high-school, Linux has been my main operating system. I embraced Open
>> Source software for a long time ago and contribute to such several
>> projects [2][3][4]. I have been with Arch Linux since 4+ years ago,
>> although only more active since 2+ years.
>>
>> My main work is concentrated on Experimental Particle Physics & the LHCb
>> Detector at the Large Hadron Collider at CERN. As part of that I have
>> been involved in the development, upgrade & maintenance of the
>> High-Level Trigger & RICH systems and LHCb's data flow [3]. I also have
>> experience with a lot of data processing & analysis - data distillation
>> & enrichment, machine learning, statistical analysis, etc - and
>> associated tools. Separately, I maintain several machines - a personal
>> web server, company server with several VMs, local workhorse server,
>> personal workstation & laptop (sprinkle around some RaspberryPis and
>> network devices here and there). This put me in a unique position to
>> work with many and different kinds of systems and software - ranging
>> from ASICs & FPGAs, through localized control systems & end-user devices
>> to large clusters & super computers. Daily, I use popular tools such as
>> VMs, docker, git, GCC, CUDA, tensorflow, Cern's ROOT, but I also run a
>> lot of custom and even-self made software [4][6]. All of this has been a
>> breeze on Arch Linux.
>>
>> Thus, a couple of years ago, I decide to get more involved and
>> contribute. I took on the task to maintain CERN's ROOT package [7] and
>> since then I've involved myself heavily into that, I'm a contributor to
>> the project and I use it daily in my work. I have been providing this
>> package for many colleagues in the field, including all of its stack &
>> complementary tools (Pythia, XRootD & other Python tools). I have
>> enabled a lot of new features and worked with upstream towards new
>> functionality, bug fixes, etc. On top of that I have shipped several
>> other related projects - machine learning packages, SciKit-HEP packages
>> like uproot, Docker images, GitLab CIs and so on.
>>
>> I have also been able to develop and publish a machine learning project
>> me and colleague came up with [4]. This is soon going to be a package in
>> SciKit-HEP and I will aim to make it package here too. Arch Linux was a
>> great platform for all of this. I was able to install & configure
>> up-to-date software easily and what I did not find, I provided for me &
>> others on the AUR without too much hassle.
>>
>> Overall, I have to say Arch Linux (and its community) have played a key
>> role in me being able to do all of these things. I have found the OS
>> itself to be stable and flexible and the users & maintainers
>> approachable and direct, which I appreciate a lot. I have met a lot of
>> people through the Arch Linux community - forums, AUR and just saying 'I
>> use Arch, too!', haha.
>>
>> The reason for applying to become a TU is to get even more involved and
>> give back to the community. If you accept me, I would like to continue
>> maintaining and improving my current packages as well as bring new
>> packages. As an AUR maintainer I basically consider it an on-going duty
>> already.
>>
>> I would like to maintain/contribute/adopt the following:
>>
>>   * Packages I would like to co-maintain:
>>   o python-awkward
>>   o libafterimage
>>   o xxhash
>>   o unuran
>>   * Packages I already maintain and intend to move from AUR:
>>   o root & root-extra
>>   o xrootd
>>   o simpletools
>>   o root5
>>   o python-root_numpy
>>   o python-uproot
>>   o python-uproot-methods
>>   o python-hep_ml
>>   o pythia
>>   o llvm50
>>   o llvm50-libs
>>   o clang50
>>   * New packages I would like to add/move from AUR:
>>   o cern-vdt
>>   o cvmfs
>>   o HepDrone [4]
>>   o python-keras
>>   o root_pandas (new)
>>   o histbook (new)
>>   o decaylanguage (new)
>>   o pyjet (new)
>>   o vegascope (new)
>>   o root_ufunc (new)
>>   o formulate (new)
>>
>> I hope to make Arch Linux more versatile and accessible to users in data
>> science, high-energy physics & machine learning, and possibly as a whole.
>>
>> Thank you.
>>
>> --
>> Regards,
>>
>> Konstantin
>>
>> 1. https://keybase.io/kgizdov
>> 2. https://github.com/kgizdov
>> 3. https://gitlab.cern.ch/kgizdov
>> 4. 

Re: [aur-general] TU Application: Daniel Bermond (dbermond)

2018-10-14 Thread Baptiste Jonglez
Hi,

On 14-10-18, Doug Newgard via aur-general wrote:
> Decided to take a quick look at your PKGBUILDs, and just a few spot checks
> makes me wonder. The first one I click on is apache-flex-sdk, I see that you
> aren't the original submitter, so I look at the git log and see that the first
> thing you did when taking over this was to remove pgp checks from the source.
> WTF. Look at the PKGBUILD, see a totally useless prepare function, ok, not a
> big thing. Let's check another one, clicked on flif, see msg2s being used for
> no reason and bad conflicts. Click on a couple more, see that those issues
> aren't mistakes, they're a fundamental misunderstanding.
> 
> Maybe my perception was colored by that really bad decision to remove the pgp
> checks, and while the PKGBUILDs are mostly fine, there seems to be things 
> about
> packaging that you don't understand yet. Is it time to become a TU already?

Well, as always, you could start by not being immediately aggressive
towards people.

Judging from the handful of PKGBUILDs I've read, the quality is really
high overall, they don't even have most of the "classical" small mistakes
(there is source renaming when needed, etc).  We don't require new TUs to
do everything perfectly, and nothing is ever perfect anyway.  There's
always something new to learn.

Regarding the PGP checks, there is no question that they are very useful
and desirable for packages in our repositories.  I am sure that Daniel
will make efforts to add PGP checks wherever possible when he moves
packages to [community].  But for the AUR, the situation is a bit
different (in my opinion) because I know it throws some people off when
they don't know that they have to import a PGP key to build the package.
I tend to include them anyway now, but I would understand that somebody
would like not to.

Anyway, for the specific case of apache-flex-sdk, look at the comments:
the signing key simply seemed to have expired.

Baptiste


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Re: [aur-general] TU Application: Daniel Bermond (dbermond)

2018-10-14 Thread Daniel Bermond via aur-general

On 10/14/18 5:03 PM, Doug Newgard via aur-general wrote:
> Decided to take a quick look at your PKGBUILDs, and just a few spot checks
> makes me wonder. The first one I click on is apache-flex-sdk, I see that you
> aren't the original submitter, so I look at the git log and see that the first
> thing you did when taking over this was to remove pgp checks from the source.
> WTF. Look at the PKGBUILD, see a totally useless prepare function, ok, not a
> big thing. Let's check another one, clicked on flif, see msg2s being used for
> no reason and bad conflicts. Click on a couple more, see that those issues
> aren't mistakes, they're a fundamental misunderstanding.
>
> Maybe my perception was colored by that really bad decision to remove the pgp
> checks, and while the PKGBUILDs are mostly fine, there seems to be things 
> about
> packaging that you don't understand yet. Is it time to become a TU already?

I usually don't use pgp on my aur packages because people tend to
complain a lot about building issues. They fail to handle the keys and
start complaining to the packager, and this is a big stress. When
dealing with repository packages this is another story, of course. Since
this was raised as a main issue, I'll be adding the pgp checks back again.

I know that we should not use msg2 because it's makepkg internal. But it
helps to diagnose user problems by helping to identify at which stage a
build error is happening. For sure I can remove it if required to. ;)

Regarding the conflicts situation, now I better understand it. I will
start to fix it my packages as soon as possible! :)

-- 
Best regards,
Daniel Bermond




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: [aur-general] TU Application - Konstantin Gizdov

2018-10-14 Thread Sven-Hendrik Haase
On Sun, Oct 14, 2018, 22:34 Konstantin Gizdov  wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I am Konstantin Gizdov [1] [2],
> (`kgizdov`, `a...@kge.pw`, `kgiz...@gmail.com`)
>
> I would like to apply to be a Trusted User under Baptiste Jonglez's
> sponsorship.
>
> A few words about me:
>
> I am currently a Particle Physics PhD at Univerisity of Edinburgh and I
> have used Linux since my early teenage years. After I finished
> high-school, Linux has been my main operating system. I embraced Open
> Source software for a long time ago and contribute to such several
> projects [2][3][4]. I have been with Arch Linux since 4+ years ago,
> although only more active since 2+ years.
>
> My main work is concentrated on Experimental Particle Physics & the LHCb
> Detector at the Large Hadron Collider at CERN. As part of that I have
> been involved in the development, upgrade & maintenance of the
> High-Level Trigger & RICH systems and LHCb's data flow [3]. I also have
> experience with a lot of data processing & analysis - data distillation
> & enrichment, machine learning, statistical analysis, etc - and
> associated tools. Separately, I maintain several machines - a personal
> web server, company server with several VMs, local workhorse server,
> personal workstation & laptop (sprinkle around some RaspberryPis and
> network devices here and there). This put me in a unique position to
> work with many and different kinds of systems and software - ranging
> from ASICs & FPGAs, through localized control systems & end-user devices
> to large clusters & super computers. Daily, I use popular tools such as
> VMs, docker, git, GCC, CUDA, tensorflow, Cern's ROOT, but I also run a
> lot of custom and even-self made software [4][6]. All of this has been a
> breeze on Arch Linux.
>
> Thus, a couple of years ago, I decide to get more involved and
> contribute. I took on the task to maintain CERN's ROOT package [7] and
> since then I've involved myself heavily into that, I'm a contributor to
> the project and I use it daily in my work. I have been providing this
> package for many colleagues in the field, including all of its stack &
> complementary tools (Pythia, XRootD & other Python tools). I have
> enabled a lot of new features and worked with upstream towards new
> functionality, bug fixes, etc. On top of that I have shipped several
> other related projects - machine learning packages, SciKit-HEP packages
> like uproot, Docker images, GitLab CIs and so on.
>
> I have also been able to develop and publish a machine learning project
> me and colleague came up with [4]. This is soon going to be a package in
> SciKit-HEP and I will aim to make it package here too. Arch Linux was a
> great platform for all of this. I was able to install & configure
> up-to-date software easily and what I did not find, I provided for me &
> others on the AUR without too much hassle.
>
> Overall, I have to say Arch Linux (and its community) have played a key
> role in me being able to do all of these things. I have found the OS
> itself to be stable and flexible and the users & maintainers
> approachable and direct, which I appreciate a lot. I have met a lot of
> people through the Arch Linux community - forums, AUR and just saying 'I
> use Arch, too!', haha.
>
> The reason for applying to become a TU is to get even more involved and
> give back to the community. If you accept me, I would like to continue
> maintaining and improving my current packages as well as bring new
> packages. As an AUR maintainer I basically consider it an on-going duty
> already.
>
> I would like to maintain/contribute/adopt the following:
>
>   * Packages I would like to co-maintain:
>   o python-awkward
>   o libafterimage
>   o xxhash
>   o unuran
>   * Packages I already maintain and intend to move from AUR:
>   o root & root-extra
>   o xrootd
>   o simpletools
>   o root5
>   o python-root_numpy
>   o python-uproot
>   o python-uproot-methods
>   o python-hep_ml
>   o pythia
>   o llvm50
>   o llvm50-libs
>   o clang50
>   * New packages I would like to add/move from AUR:
>   o cern-vdt
>   o cvmfs
>   o HepDrone [4]
>   o python-keras
>   o root_pandas (new)
>   o histbook (new)
>   o decaylanguage (new)
>   o pyjet (new)
>   o vegascope (new)
>   o root_ufunc (new)
>   o formulate (new)
>
> I hope to make Arch Linux more versatile and accessible to users in data
> science, high-energy physics & machine learning, and possibly as a whole.
>
> Thank you.
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Konstantin
>
> 1. https://keybase.io/kgizdov
> 2. https://github.com/kgizdov
> 3. https://gitlab.cern.ch/kgizdov
> 4. https://github.com/Tevien/HEPDrone
> 5. https://github.com/scikit-hep
> 6. https://gitlab.cern.ch/kgizdov/pdqa-automation


Great stuff. Would you be interested in co-maintaining tensorflow, cuda and
pytorch and related packages? They sometimes cost a lot of time to fix up.


Re: [aur-general] Questions about some of my packages being adopted in [community]

2018-10-14 Thread Konstantin Gizdov
> Yes I did check the comments, which turned out to be a very old comment
> about extra dependencies in rxvt-unicode-afterimage if enabled. Since
> the mentioned package doesn't even exist today, I believe it's not an
> issue anymore.
That's good. I had to recompile `root` to properly link the other day
and can confirm it worked for me, just wasn't sure in general as I
couldn't find the history anymore.

On 14/10/2018 22:19, Felix Yan wrote:
> On 10/1/18 2:51 AM, Konstantin Gizdov wrote:
>> I believe that is not true. I even enabled more functionality in
>>> libafterimage, actually.
>> You mean when you removed `--disable-svg` flag? I might be wrong, but I
>> think there was a reason to leave it disabled. You'd have to check comments
>> or Gentoo/Fedora package to be sure.
> Yes I did check the comments, which turned out to be a very old comment
> about extra dependencies in rxvt-unicode-afterimage if enabled. Since
> the mentioned package doesn't even exist today, I believe it's not an
> issue anymore.
>
>>> There's precedence for maintainers of specialized software in the AUR to be
>>>
>>> sponsored to become a Trusted User (though it seems there's a preexisting
>>>
>>> relationship?).
>>>
>>> I am not sure how much this applies to me in this case, but if it does I
>>> can say the following. I am willing to apply for a Trusted User to maintain
>>> ROOT's stack for Arch. I use the ROOT software on a daily basis. I take
>>> great care of the package (the whole stack actually) as my work depends on
>>> it. I have a test bench and people in my professional area use it and
>>> depend on me to bring improvements and new possibilities. I have involved
>>> myself and consider it an on-going duty. I have the skills and know-how to
>>> maintain the ROOT stack and I can say with certainty that AUR's ROOT
>>> package is only second to Fedora's package across other distros. But I also
>>> understand it is not perfect and am interested in making it better as I've
>>> shown previously here and to its users.
> Glad to see your TU application, it would be great if you will maintain
> the related software in the official repositories instead, as you are
> definitely more familiar and I have too many packages already :)
>
> (I somehow forgot to reply to the question above, sorry for the late reply!)
>



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: [aur-general] Questions about some of my packages being adopted in [community]

2018-10-14 Thread Felix Yan via aur-general
On 10/1/18 2:51 AM, Konstantin Gizdov wrote:
> I believe that is not true. I even enabled more functionality in
>> libafterimage, actually.
> 
> You mean when you removed `--disable-svg` flag? I might be wrong, but I
> think there was a reason to leave it disabled. You'd have to check comments
> or Gentoo/Fedora package to be sure.

Yes I did check the comments, which turned out to be a very old comment
about extra dependencies in rxvt-unicode-afterimage if enabled. Since
the mentioned package doesn't even exist today, I believe it's not an
issue anymore.

>> There's precedence for maintainers of specialized software in the AUR to be
>>
>> sponsored to become a Trusted User (though it seems there's a preexisting
>>
>> relationship?).
>>
>> I am not sure how much this applies to me in this case, but if it does I
>> can say the following. I am willing to apply for a Trusted User to maintain
>> ROOT's stack for Arch. I use the ROOT software on a daily basis. I take
>> great care of the package (the whole stack actually) as my work depends on
>> it. I have a test bench and people in my professional area use it and
>> depend on me to bring improvements and new possibilities. I have involved
>> myself and consider it an on-going duty. I have the skills and know-how to
>> maintain the ROOT stack and I can say with certainty that AUR's ROOT
>> package is only second to Fedora's package across other distros. But I also
>> understand it is not perfect and am interested in making it better as I've
>> shown previously here and to its users.

Glad to see your TU application, it would be great if you will maintain
the related software in the official repositories instead, as you are
definitely more familiar and I have too many packages already :)

(I somehow forgot to reply to the question above, sorry for the late reply!)

-- 
Regards,
Felix Yan



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: [aur-general] TU Application: Daniel Bermond (dbermond)

2018-10-14 Thread Baptiste Jonglez
Hi,

On 14-10-18, Daniel Bermond via aur-general wrote:
> My name is Daniel Bermond and my alias on the AUR and forums is
> dbermond[1][3].
> 
> Bruno Pagani (alias: ArchangeGabriel) is sponsoring my Trusted User 
> application. I would like to highly thank Bruno for accepting to be my 
> sponsor.

Welcome here!

I see that you maintain a fair number of useful and popular packages,
thanks for the work it represents.

I had a look at some of your packages (including the ones you mention
below), and they are in pretty good shape.

> I would like to bring the following packages into [community]:
> - advancecomp
> - kvazaar
> - intel-media-sdk
> - libmysofa
> - openh264
> - shine
> - vmaf

Out of curiosity, do you plan to only bring these 7 packages to
[community], or is it just a highlight?  Out of those 7, only 4 are
currently maintained by you (unless I'm being tricked by the new
co-maintainer feature), and they are not the most popular packages you
have.

Baptiste


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Re: [aur-general] TU Application - Konstantin Gizdov

2018-10-14 Thread Baptiste Jonglez
Hi,

On 14-10-18, Konstantin Gizdov wrote:
> I am Konstantin Gizdov [1] [2],
> (`kgizdov`, `a...@kge.pw`, `kgiz...@gmail.com`)
> 
> I would like to apply to be a Trusted User under Baptiste Jonglez's
> sponsorship.

I confirm my sponsorship of Konstantin.  Let the discussion period begin,
it seems to be a good day to apply to become a TU!

Baptiste


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


[aur-general] TU Application - Konstantin Gizdov

2018-10-14 Thread Konstantin Gizdov
Hello,

I am Konstantin Gizdov [1] [2],
(`kgizdov`, `a...@kge.pw`, `kgiz...@gmail.com`)

I would like to apply to be a Trusted User under Baptiste Jonglez's
sponsorship.

A few words about me:

I am currently a Particle Physics PhD at Univerisity of Edinburgh and I
have used Linux since my early teenage years. After I finished
high-school, Linux has been my main operating system. I embraced Open
Source software for a long time ago and contribute to such several
projects [2][3][4]. I have been with Arch Linux since 4+ years ago,
although only more active since 2+ years.

My main work is concentrated on Experimental Particle Physics & the LHCb
Detector at the Large Hadron Collider at CERN. As part of that I have
been involved in the development, upgrade & maintenance of the
High-Level Trigger & RICH systems and LHCb's data flow [3]. I also have
experience with a lot of data processing & analysis - data distillation
& enrichment, machine learning, statistical analysis, etc - and
associated tools. Separately, I maintain several machines - a personal
web server, company server with several VMs, local workhorse server,
personal workstation & laptop (sprinkle around some RaspberryPis and
network devices here and there). This put me in a unique position to
work with many and different kinds of systems and software - ranging
from ASICs & FPGAs, through localized control systems & end-user devices
to large clusters & super computers. Daily, I use popular tools such as
VMs, docker, git, GCC, CUDA, tensorflow, Cern's ROOT, but I also run a
lot of custom and even-self made software [4][6]. All of this has been a
breeze on Arch Linux.

Thus, a couple of years ago, I decide to get more involved and
contribute. I took on the task to maintain CERN's ROOT package [7] and
since then I've involved myself heavily into that, I'm a contributor to
the project and I use it daily in my work. I have been providing this
package for many colleagues in the field, including all of its stack &
complementary tools (Pythia, XRootD & other Python tools). I have
enabled a lot of new features and worked with upstream towards new
functionality, bug fixes, etc. On top of that I have shipped several
other related projects - machine learning packages, SciKit-HEP packages
like uproot, Docker images, GitLab CIs and so on.

I have also been able to develop and publish a machine learning project
me and colleague came up with [4]. This is soon going to be a package in
SciKit-HEP and I will aim to make it package here too. Arch Linux was a
great platform for all of this. I was able to install & configure
up-to-date software easily and what I did not find, I provided for me &
others on the AUR without too much hassle.

Overall, I have to say Arch Linux (and its community) have played a key
role in me being able to do all of these things. I have found the OS
itself to be stable and flexible and the users & maintainers
approachable and direct, which I appreciate a lot. I have met a lot of
people through the Arch Linux community - forums, AUR and just saying 'I
use Arch, too!', haha.

The reason for applying to become a TU is to get even more involved and
give back to the community. If you accept me, I would like to continue
maintaining and improving my current packages as well as bring new
packages. As an AUR maintainer I basically consider it an on-going duty
already.

I would like to maintain/contribute/adopt the following:

  * Packages I would like to co-maintain:
  o python-awkward
  o libafterimage
  o xxhash
  o unuran
  * Packages I already maintain and intend to move from AUR:
  o root & root-extra
  o xrootd
  o simpletools
  o root5
  o python-root_numpy
  o python-uproot
  o python-uproot-methods
  o python-hep_ml
  o pythia
  o llvm50
  o llvm50-libs
  o clang50
  * New packages I would like to add/move from AUR:
  o cern-vdt
  o cvmfs
  o HepDrone [4]
  o python-keras
  o root_pandas (new)
  o histbook (new)
  o decaylanguage (new)
  o pyjet (new)
  o vegascope (new)
  o root_ufunc (new)
  o formulate (new)

I hope to make Arch Linux more versatile and accessible to users in data
science, high-energy physics & machine learning, and possibly as a whole.

Thank you.

-- 
Regards,

Konstantin

1. https://keybase.io/kgizdov
2. https://github.com/kgizdov
3. https://gitlab.cern.ch/kgizdov
4. https://github.com/Tevien/HEPDrone
5. https://github.com/scikit-hep
6. https://gitlab.cern.ch/kgizdov/pdqa-automation


signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: [aur-general] TU Application: Daniel Bermond (dbermond)

2018-10-14 Thread Doug Newgard via aur-general
Decided to take a quick look at your PKGBUILDs, and just a few spot checks
makes me wonder. The first one I click on is apache-flex-sdk, I see that you
aren't the original submitter, so I look at the git log and see that the first
thing you did when taking over this was to remove pgp checks from the source.
WTF. Look at the PKGBUILD, see a totally useless prepare function, ok, not a
big thing. Let's check another one, clicked on flif, see msg2s being used for
no reason and bad conflicts. Click on a couple more, see that those issues
aren't mistakes, they're a fundamental misunderstanding.

Maybe my perception was colored by that really bad decision to remove the pgp
checks, and while the PKGBUILDs are mostly fine, there seems to be things about
packaging that you don't understand yet. Is it time to become a TU already?


pgplsmnZ8qVUJ.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: [aur-general] TU Application: Daniel Bermond (dbermond)

2018-10-14 Thread Bruno Pagani via aur-general
Hi,

I hereby confirm my sponsorship of Daniel.

Let the (new 14 days format) discussion period begin!

Regards,
Bruno

P.S.: Please excuse the absence of line wrapping in Daniel e-mail,
that’s my fault for having attempted to fix the reverse problem (text
editor + TB line wrapping).

Le 14/10/2018 à 21:49, Daniel Bermond via aur-general a écrit :
> Hi,
>
> My name is Daniel Bermond and my alias on the AUR and forums is
> dbermond[1][3].
>
> Bruno Pagani (alias: ArchangeGabriel) is sponsoring my Trusted User 
> application. I would like to highly thank Bruno for accepting to be my 
> sponsor.
>
> I'm a Brazilian doctor (physician). Yes, my job and profession are not 
> related to the computing world, but since childhood I'm an enthusiast of the 
> computing and software world. I've beeing using Linux since many years ago, 
> and it's difficult to tell when I started, but it has been a long time. By 
> searching in the middle of some old things here I could find some old Ubuntu 
> CD-ROMs of the 7.04 (2007) version from the time they still shipped free 
> disks worldwide, so I can for sure say that I have 11 years of Linux usage at 
> minimum. But my initial Linux usage starts even before this, with some old 
> RedHat distribution that didn't run very well on my poor graphics card, at a 
> time that I cannot tell precisely. For many years I did the famous 
> distro-hopping and have used many major distributions: openSUSE, Fedora, 
> Mandrake/Mandriva (when they still existed), PCLinuxOS, Ubuntu and variants, 
> Mint and probably others.
>
> I have started to use Arch in 2015. At that time I was at Linux Mint and feel 
> the need for something better and different. I found myself in need of more 
> recent software, being disappointed with the Mint/Ubuntu outdated ones. I was 
> also very tired to reinstall the system every one (or two) year(s). When Mint 
> went for shipping LTS-only releases, I decided that a rolling release 
> distribution should be my new place. By already having many years of Linux 
> usage and experience in the background, Arch was everything that I was 
> looking for. Added the fact of being able to fully customize my system by 
> building packages that could be easily integrated in the system with pacman.
>
> After felling confident with Arch itself, I've started to contribute packages 
> to the AUR. I can perfectly remember my first one: ffmpeg-full-git. It was, 
> and still is, a pleasure to maintain it, firstly because I was in need for 
> it, and, secondly, because I was contributing back to the community something 
> that was useful for me. Things evolved quickly, I started to maintain more 
> and more packages that I was also in need for, while adopting other orphaned 
> ones, and currently I'm the maintainer of 170+ packages[2].
>
> Some of the packages that I maintained were already brought into the official 
> repositories:
> - ffnvcodec-headers
> - intel-gmmlib (formerly named gmmlib on the AUR, adopted by my sponsor Bruno)
> - intel-media-driver (adopted by my sponsor Bruno Pagani)
> - libraqm
> - nccl
> - pybind11* (TU Santiago announced me that he will bring it into [community])
>
> Among the years, I've studied C, x86 assembly, Python and shellscript. I'm 
> trying to add C++ to the list, already started it, but still need to find 
> more time to dedicate to it. I've made some contributions to the open source 
> world.
> I have a project of my own called screencast[4], which is a command line 
> interface to record a X11 desktop using FFmpeg, having support for offline 
> recording, live streaming and the capability of adding some effects. It's 
> written in pure POSIX/portable shellscript. Besides this, I've made a few 
> commits here and there into the following open source projects: caffe2[5] 
> (now on pytorch github repository), intel gstreamer media SDK[6][7] and intel 
> media sdk[8]. So I also try to contribute back to some upstream projects when 
> my not-so-wide programming skills allow me. I also report bugs to the 
> upstream open source projects for packages which I maintain on the AUR if I 
> encounter some that affects the building process or my direct usage.
>
> I would like to become a Trusted User to be able to contribute to the Arch 
> community as much as I can.
>
> I would like to bring the following packages into [community]:
> - advancecomp
> - kvazaar
> - intel-media-sdk
> - libmysofa
> - openh264
> - shine
> - vmaf
>
> I'm also willing to co-maintain my already mentioned old AUR packages. It 
> would be a pleasure.
>
> I think that's all. Thanks to everyone that is reading and analysing my 
> application.
>
> Best regards,
> Daniel Bermond
>
> [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/dbermond
> [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/?SeB=M=dbermond
> [3] https://github.com/dbermond/
> [4] https://github.com/dbermond/screencast/
> [5] https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/commits?author=dbermond
> [6] 

[aur-general] TU Application: Daniel Bermond (dbermond)

2018-10-14 Thread Daniel Bermond via aur-general
Hi,

My name is Daniel Bermond and my alias on the AUR and forums is
dbermond[1][3].

Bruno Pagani (alias: ArchangeGabriel) is sponsoring my Trusted User 
application. I would like to highly thank Bruno for accepting to be my sponsor.

I'm a Brazilian doctor (physician). Yes, my job and profession are not related 
to the computing world, but since childhood I'm an enthusiast of the computing 
and software world. I've beeing using Linux since many years ago, and it's 
difficult to tell when I started, but it has been a long time. By searching in 
the middle of some old things here I could find some old Ubuntu CD-ROMs of the 
7.04 (2007) version from the time they still shipped free disks worldwide, so I 
can for sure say that I have 11 years of Linux usage at minimum. But my initial 
Linux usage starts even before this, with some old RedHat distribution that 
didn't run very well on my poor graphics card, at a time that I cannot tell 
precisely. For many years I did the famous distro-hopping and have used many 
major distributions: openSUSE, Fedora, Mandrake/Mandriva (when they still 
existed), PCLinuxOS, Ubuntu and variants, Mint and probably others.

I have started to use Arch in 2015. At that time I was at Linux Mint and feel 
the need for something better and different. I found myself in need of more 
recent software, being disappointed with the Mint/Ubuntu outdated ones. I was 
also very tired to reinstall the system every one (or two) year(s). When Mint 
went for shipping LTS-only releases, I decided that a rolling release 
distribution should be my new place. By already having many years of Linux 
usage and experience in the background, Arch was everything that I was looking 
for. Added the fact of being able to fully customize my system by building 
packages that could be easily integrated in the system with pacman.

After felling confident with Arch itself, I've started to contribute packages 
to the AUR. I can perfectly remember my first one: ffmpeg-full-git. It was, and 
still is, a pleasure to maintain it, firstly because I was in need for it, and, 
secondly, because I was contributing back to the community something that was 
useful for me. Things evolved quickly, I started to maintain more and more 
packages that I was also in need for, while adopting other orphaned ones, and 
currently I'm the maintainer of 170+ packages[2].

Some of the packages that I maintained were already brought into the official 
repositories:
- ffnvcodec-headers
- intel-gmmlib (formerly named gmmlib on the AUR, adopted by my sponsor Bruno)
- intel-media-driver (adopted by my sponsor Bruno Pagani)
- libraqm
- nccl
- pybind11* (TU Santiago announced me that he will bring it into [community])

Among the years, I've studied C, x86 assembly, Python and shellscript. I'm 
trying to add C++ to the list, already started it, but still need to find more 
time to dedicate to it. I've made some contributions to the open source world.
I have a project of my own called screencast[4], which is a command line 
interface to record a X11 desktop using FFmpeg, having support for offline 
recording, live streaming and the capability of adding some effects. It's 
written in pure POSIX/portable shellscript. Besides this, I've made a few 
commits here and there into the following open source projects: caffe2[5] (now 
on pytorch github repository), intel gstreamer media SDK[6][7] and intel media 
sdk[8]. So I also try to contribute back to some upstream projects when my 
not-so-wide programming skills allow me. I also report bugs to the upstream 
open source projects for packages which I maintain on the AUR if I encounter 
some that affects the building process or my direct usage.

I would like to become a Trusted User to be able to contribute to the Arch 
community as much as I can.

I would like to bring the following packages into [community]:
- advancecomp
- kvazaar
- intel-media-sdk
- libmysofa
- openh264
- shine
- vmaf

I'm also willing to co-maintain my already mentioned old AUR packages. It would 
be a pleasure.

I think that's all. Thanks to everyone that is reading and analysing my 
application.

Best regards,
Daniel Bermond

[1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/dbermond
[2] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/?SeB=M=dbermond
[3] https://github.com/dbermond/
[4] https://github.com/dbermond/screencast/
[5] https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/commits?author=dbermond
[6] https://github.com/intel/gstreamer-media-SDK/commits?author=dbermond
[7] 
https://github.com/intel/gstreamer-media-SDK/commits/topic_linux_and_window?author=dbermond
[8] https://github.com/Intel-Media-SDK/MediaSDK/commits?author=dbermond




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature