Arch Linux User Repository

@fgr - Could you please check the md5sums in the PKGBUILD. I'm getting a "One or more files did not pass the validity check!" on "localepurge.8.patch ... FAILED". Thanks

There are no updates for localepurge script, but I've revised localepurge man page and the PKGBUILD (replaced bash '[[' with sh '[').

I've just moved my patches to another host, renamed the ones from '*.diff' to '*.patch' and changed my email address in the localepurge.8.patch file.

Ahh OK. Anyway I wanted to bring this to [community], but I've decided it's best left here and under your care. So keep up the work with this :)

Updated PKGBUILD to apply the hint by schivmeister. Note: I'm going to update pkgrel (starting from 1) since a new upstream version will be released.

Hi schivmeister, sorry for the delay in replying. About first point: I haven't decided to release a fork of the localepurge original version. However, as you rightly say later in your comment, the GPL doesn't grant me permission to redistribute a work with another license. About second point: probably, I'll follow your hints. Thanks. > One final note is that I don't know whether your licensing is valid, since you are deriving GPL work. GPL dictates copyleft for derived works. The Gentoo adaptation of localepurge is also GPL. Why go through the trouble of changing the license (to an invalid one) when all you're doing is patching the program for redistribution? IMO, my license is like CPL <http://www.cypherspace.org/CPL/> or WTFPL <http://sam.zoy.org/wtfpl/>. Obviously, only my code is released with my custom license (that is for my patches). Just a note about my license: I think the GPL is not truly free. Moreover, it doesn't reject intellectual property. I don't give a damn about some silly laws. My license hasn't approved by any institutions or state laws. It's just for this that, IMO, one is very permissive. And people aren't able to use the law to enforce the rights given by the license. But this is philosophy and off topic here.

Hello One thing: the copyright notes on the debian page tells me this is GPL software. Why is the license here custom? edit: nevermind..i see this is your own patched tarball it's downloading. edit2: you can go 2 ways.. 1) You should just pre-patch the files and release the tarball. In this case you would be "upstream". So the PKGBUILD should only need to move files around. As you would be deriving an existing work, you are free to bump or add revision numbers. A "localepurge-arch-0.6.2_$customrel" looks good to me and the underscore is friendly with our package management (ie. $pkgver). OR 2) Release only your patches. The PKGBUILD should download the deb src or whatever it is that gives you the original files. It will also download your patches, and the steps would be pretty much the same as they are now. If your patches change, there will be pkgrel updates only. One final note is that I don't know whether your licensing is valid, since you are deriving GPL work. GPL dictates copyleft for derived works. The Gentoo adaptation of localepurge is also GPL. Why go through the trouble of changing the license (to an invalid one) when all you're doing is patching the program for redistribution?