Search Criteria
Package Details: sensible-utils 0.0.24-2
Package Actions
Git Clone URL: | https://aur.archlinux.org/sensible-utils.git (read-only, click to copy) |
---|---|
Package Base: | sensible-utils |
Description: | Utilities for sensible alternative selection |
Upstream URL: | https://salsa.debian.org/debian/sensible-utils |
Licenses: | GPL-2.0-or-later |
Conflicts: | sensible-browser-git, sensible-editor-git, sensible-pager-git, sensible-terminal-git, sensible-utils-data-git, sensible-utils-git |
Provides: | sensible-browser, sensible-editor |
Submitter: | pcarrier |
Maintainer: | xiota |
Last Packager: | xiota |
Votes: | 27 |
Popularity: | 0.000000 |
First Submitted: | 2012-04-05 14:14 (UTC) |
Last Updated: | 2024-12-21 01:53 (UTC) |
Dependencies (4)
- bash (bash-devel-gitAUR, bash-gitAUR)
- po4a (make)
- ed (check)
- shellcheck (shellcheck-binAUR, shellcheck-gitAUR) (check)
Required by (5)
- devscripts (requires sensible-browser)
- devscripts (requires sensible-editor)
- e-wrapper
- git-dpm (requires sensible-editor) (optional)
- reportbug (optional)
Latest Comments
« First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next › Last »
fbrennan commented on 2023-06-26 02:25 (UTC)
The fork bomb test is annoying and if users agree I'm happy to restore my old patch which did just that, removed it.
eclairevoyant commented on 2023-06-25 19:39 (UTC)
@damentz read
man makepkg
damentz commented on 2023-06-25 06:00 (UTC)
Maybe the fork bomb test is invalid? Until it's resolved, simply commenting out the
make check
line works for now. Would be nice to be able to pick tests or just patch it out instead of making Arch Linux behave like Debian through a workaround.npreining commented on 2023-06-25 01:17 (UTC)
Package revision -5 still fails to build due an error in the fork-bomb test. Is there any special setting that needs to be taken to prevent this to happen?
eclairevoyant commented on 2023-06-22 14:11 (UTC)
@gardotd426 yes,
sensible-utils
doesn't need to provide anything because it's a metapackage that depends on all of the packages.This is the correct behavior.
gardotd426 commented on 2023-06-22 13:58 (UTC)
@eclairevoyant, I'm sorry it was
sensible-utils-unified
. Notsensible-utils-combined
. I don't know why I got those mixed up lol.Meanwhile,
sensible-utils
:npreining commented on 2023-06-22 12:42 (UTC)
What is going on with sensible-utils? Every single update breaks. First a transition issue it seems, now it does not build due to
?
fbrennan commented on 2023-06-21 09:23 (UTC)
How about no. First of all, "AUR helpers" is vague. They are legion, and supporting all of them is simply impossible as many have huge bugs. I will do my best to support
yay
as it seems most popular in my packages, but users should not rely on AUR helpers.eclairevoyant commented on 2023-06-21 04:53 (UTC)
sensible-utils-combined
is not a package in the AUR. If your already-installed version is wrong then install the new version? I don't know what to reply about that.Nothing about this sentence makes sense. Packages in the AUR are meant to follow AUR guidelines.
As mentioned in https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/AUR_helpers:
And that's not even how AUR helpers work, it is impossible for them to work the way you described, as you cannot even query
provides
via the AUR RPC interface. So shoving uselessprovides
into a package is not going to do anything for searchability or dependency resolution. I don't know where you got that idea from.« First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next › Last »