Difference between revisions of "Talk:Unofficial user repositories"

From ArchWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Outdated and confusing intro)
(Why don't repos provide files.tar.gz database?: re)
Line 5: Line 5:
  
 
[[User:Karol|Karol]] 11:34, 16 January 2011 (EST)
 
[[User:Karol|Karol]] 11:34, 16 January 2011 (EST)
 +
 +
:Maybe it's time to ask this question on the forum (I hope it's not yet a crime to instigate Karol to post something on the forum :D ). -- [[User:Kynikos|Kynikos]] ([[User talk:Kynikos|talk]]) 11:57, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
  
 
== Outdated and confusing intro ==
 
== Outdated and confusing intro ==

Revision as of 11:57, 27 September 2012

Why don't repos provide files.tar.gz database?

Is there a reason many (most?) user repos don't provide files.tar.gz? http://projects.archlinux.org/dbscripts.git/tree/cron-jobs/create-filelists

Without it tools like pkgfile won't work.

Karol 11:34, 16 January 2011 (EST)

Maybe it's time to ask this question on the forum (I hope it's not yet a crime to instigate Karol to post something on the forum :D ). -- Kynikos (talk) 11:57, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Outdated and confusing intro

Do we need Unofficial_User_Repositories#The_future_of_Unofficial_repos? Not everyone has to be interested in the history and who's who of Arch. If this idea is still worth keeping, can we move it to the talk page?

I also don't like the next heading (but just the heading, not the contents): Unofficial_User_Repositories#List_of_PUR_.28unofficial_user_repositories.29. What is PUR? Personal Users' Repositories? Can we decide on a single name - is it personal or unofficial? -- Karol (talk) 21:04, 26 September 2012 (UTC)