Search Criteria
Package Details: netkit-rwho-debian 0.17-10
Package Actions
Git Clone URL: | https://aur.archlinux.org/netkit-rwho-debian.git (read-only, click to copy) |
---|---|
Package Base: | netkit-rwho-debian |
Description: | Remote who client and server (with Debian patches) |
Upstream URL: | https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/netkit-rwho |
Licenses: | BSD-4-Clause-UC |
Submitter: | mortzu |
Maintainer: | chowbok |
Last Packager: | chowbok |
Votes: | 7 |
Popularity: | 0.000000 |
First Submitted: | 2009-01-20 12:42 (UTC) |
Last Updated: | 2024-07-15 02:02 (UTC) |
Dependencies (4)
- glibc (glibc-gitAUR, glibc-linux4AUR, glibc-eacAUR, glibc-eac-binAUR, glibc-eac-rocoAUR)
- bash (bash-devel-static-gitAUR, bash-devel-gitAUR, busybox-coreutilsAUR, bash-gitAUR) (optional) – to execute cron script
- cron (scron-gitAUR, vixie-cronAUR, busybox-crondAUR, mcronAUR, dcronAUR, dcron-gitAUR, cronie-selinuxAUR, systemd-cron-next-gitAUR, systemd-cronAUR, cronie, fcron) (optional) – alternate way to monthly delete old /var/spool/rwho files
- systemd (systemd-chromiumosAUR, systemd-gitAUR, systemd-fmlAUR, systemd-selinuxAUR) (optional) – to run daemon, and optionally delete old /var/spool/rwho files monthly
Latest Comments
1 2 Next › Last »
chowbok commented on 2024-05-26 11:27 (UTC)
Okay, done.
micwoj92 commented on 2024-05-26 10:48 (UTC)
If we go by this route, then any package could remove glibc/systemd from depends because it can be safely assumed (until it isn't). Namcap can give suggestion what can be done about packaging to improve it.
chowbok commented on 2024-05-26 10:41 (UTC)
Why? glibc and systemd can be safely assumed to be on the system, sh is unnecessary. I guess I could re-add cron as an optional dependency, but it seems a little silly when you can just use the systemd timer.
micwoj92 commented on 2024-05-26 10:27 (UTC)
Please readd dependencies.
grahamedgecombe commented on 2018-05-31 17:47 (UTC)
Thanks, I've added arm and aarch64 to the arch array. I don't have any ARM hardware so I'll just trust that it works!
chowbok commented on 2018-05-31 01:59 (UTC)
Argh, sorry, it's "aarch64", not "aarm64".
chowbok commented on 2018-05-31 01:53 (UTC)
Answering my own question: no, it does not. So Graham, can you also add "aarm64" when you get a chance? Probably doesn't need a version bump, since anyone who already has it doesn't need it.
Thanks, and sorry to be a pest.
chowbok commented on 2018-05-31 01:40 (UTC)
Will "arm" also cover "aarm64"?
ddouglass commented on 2018-05-15 15:46 (UTC)
compiles and runs fine on armv5tel. I think you can safely replace 'armv6h' and 'armv7h' with simply 'arm'
chowbok commented on 2018-02-27 04:34 (UTC)
Thanks!
1 2 Next › Last »