[Dev] duplicate 'unarchiver' packages

Megver83 megver83 at hyperbola.info
Mon May 14 03:52:31 GMT 2018

El 13/05/18 a las 18:17, bill-auger escribió:
> the parabola package 'unar' may not longer be necessary as it seems arch
> has begun packaging the same program under the name 'unarchiver' so
> there is now the same program available in two different repos under
> different names - this is not critical but the current situation is very
> confusing how it got to be this way - can anyone sort out how to handle this
> the 'unar' package is listed in the blacklist as replacing the 'unrar'
> package - but those are not the same software - that would explain the
> different name but that would not be considered to be a replacement but
> a completely unrelated alternative - i would really like to see the
> blacklist data be as informative and helpful as possible - this
> particular example is more confusing than helpful - the blacklist
> descriptions should all read something like: "the parabola version of
> this program was liberated in the following ways ...." in which case the
> parabola package lives in [libre] and usually has the same name as the
> non-free package - or else it should read: "parabola did not liberate
> this package but the following alternative is recommended instead ...."
> with the alternative package having a different name and noted only in
> the description but not in the metadata column #2 as the definitive
> liberated replacement
> secondly, the PKGBUILD for 'unar' has it replacing the 'unarchiver'
> which was presumably in the AUR when this was added - but that would not
> explain the different name because it is exactly the same program - it
> furthermore is not modified in any significant way from the upstream so
> therefore does not belong in [libre] but instead in [PCR]
> this is issue #1769 https://labs.parabola.nu/issues/1769
> _______________________________________________
> Dev mailing list
> Dev at lists.parabola.nu
> https://lists.parabola.nu/mailman/listinfo/dev
since both unarchiver and unar provide the same binaries, then unar
should be dropped


SIP: megver83 at sip.linphone.org
XMPP: megver83 at jabjab.de
Tox: megver83 at toxme.io
GPG: 0x227CA7C556B2BA78
GNUSocial: @megver82 at quitter.cl
Diaspora*: megver83 at diasp.org
Matrix: @Megver83:matrix.org

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 520 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.parabola.nu/pipermail/dev/attachments/20180513/2bdefd29/attachment.sig>

More information about the Dev mailing list