Discussion:
Curious about arch repository policy
Add Reply
Sudarshan Kakoty via arch-general
2018-03-27 14:57:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Hello...

I was reading "Arch Wiki" and felt curious about that difference
between extra and community repo.

Some packages, such as "meson" is in the "extra" repo, whereas "ninja"
is in "community" repo. The interesting fact is that - is an implicit
dependency to "meson". So why that is (ninja) in the community repo?

Also, some critical GNOME specific packages are part of the community
repo. Even, some compilers, like Haskell is also part of the community
repo. What is the exact difference between extra and community
repository?

I wonder, Is it really important to have that split?
--
Sudarshan Kakoty <***@yahoo.com>
Dragon ryu via arch-general
2018-03-27 15:13:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
2018年3月27日(火) 23:57 Sudarshan Kakoty via arch-general <
Post by Sudarshan Kakoty via arch-general
Hello...
I was reading "Arch Wiki" and felt curious about that difference
between extra and community repo.
Some packages, such as "meson" is in the "extra" repo, whereas "ninja"
is in "community" repo. The interesting fact is that - is an implicit
dependency to "meson". So why that is (ninja) in the community repo?
Also, some critical GNOME specific packages are part of the community
repo. Even, some compilers, like Haskell is also part of the community
repo. What is the exact difference between extra and community
repository?
I wonder, Is it really important to have that split?
--
simply saying.
community is TU managed repo; mostly from AUR by vote.
extra is higher than that.
Jelle van der Waa
2018-03-27 16:38:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
2018幎3月27日(火) 23:57 Sudarshan Kakoty via arch-general <
Post by Sudarshan Kakoty via arch-general
Hello...
I was reading "Arch Wiki" and felt curious about that difference
between extra and community repo.
Some packages, such as "meson" is in the "extra" repo, whereas "ninja"
is in "community" repo. The interesting fact is that - is an implicit
dependency to "meson". So why that is (ninja) in the community repo?
Also, some critical GNOME specific packages are part of the community
repo. Even, some compilers, like Haskell is also part of the community
repo. What is the exact difference between extra and community
repository?
I wonder, Is it really important to have that split?
--
simply saying.
community is TU managed repo; mostly from AUR by vote.
To be clear, votes don't matter for a package to be moved to
[community]. Some popular packages with many votes simply can't enter
the repository due to licensing or no interest of the TU's to maintain
it.
--
Jelle van der Waa
Leonid Isaev via arch-general
2018-03-27 19:34:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sudarshan Kakoty via arch-general
Hello...
I was reading "Arch Wiki" and felt curious about that difference
between extra and community repo.
Some packages, such as "meson" is in the "extra" repo, whereas "ninja"
is in "community" repo. The interesting fact is that - is an implicit
dependency to "meson". So why that is (ninja) in the community repo?
A more important question is why meson and ninja are not in [core] and base
group given that they are build-dependencies of systemd?

Cheers,
L.
--
Leonid Isaev
morganamilo via arch-general
2018-03-27 19:39:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Leonid Isaev via arch-general
Post by Sudarshan Kakoty via arch-general
Hello...
I was reading "Arch Wiki" and felt curious about that difference
between extra and community repo.
Some packages, such as "meson" is in the "extra" repo, whereas "ninja"
is in "community" repo. The interesting fact is that - is an implicit
dependency to "meson". So why that is (ninja) in the community repo?
A more important question is why meson and ninja are not in [core] and base
group given that they are build-dependencies of systemd?
Cheers,
L.
Probably because they're only make depends like you said. So in a user's
system make depends are not needed to install packages nor do they
provide any use.
Leonid Isaev via arch-general
2018-03-27 20:13:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by morganamilo via arch-general
Post by Leonid Isaev via arch-general
Post by Sudarshan Kakoty via arch-general
Hello...
I was reading "Arch Wiki" and felt curious about that difference
between extra and community repo.
Some packages, such as "meson" is in the "extra" repo, whereas "ninja"
is in "community" repo. The interesting fact is that - is an implicit
dependency to "meson". So why that is (ninja) in the community repo?
A more important question is why meson and ninja are not in [core] and base
group given that they are build-dependencies of systemd?
Cheers,
L.
Probably because they're only make depends like you said. So in a user's
system make depends are not needed to install packages nor do they provide
any use.
But I thought [core] was supposed to be self-contained, or it only used to be?

Cheers,
--
Leonid Isaev
morganamilo via arch-general
2018-03-27 20:17:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Leonid Isaev via arch-general
Post by morganamilo via arch-general
Post by Leonid Isaev via arch-general
Post by Sudarshan Kakoty via arch-general
Hello...
I was reading "Arch Wiki" and felt curious about that difference
between extra and community repo.
Some packages, such as "meson" is in the "extra" repo, whereas "ninja"
is in "community" repo. The interesting fact is that - is an implicit
dependency to "meson". So why that is (ninja) in the community repo?
A more important question is why meson and ninja are not in [core] and base
group given that they are build-dependencies of systemd?
Cheers,
L.
Probably because they're only make depends like you said. So in a user's
system make depends are not needed to install packages nor do they provide
any use.
But I thought [core] was supposed to be self-contained, or it only used to be?
Cheers,.
From a user's perspectvie they are self contained. Arch is a binary
distro, the user does not need to mess with make depends.
Bardur Arantsson
2018-03-27 20:22:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Leonid Isaev via arch-general
But I thought [core] was supposed to be self-contained, or it only used to be?
Not sure about the history here, but given the fact that most systems
are bootstrapped from e.g. a cross-compiler, I don't think there's any
real system that's self-contained these days.

(That's not to say that it doesn't matter *at all* what's required, but
it makes a lot of sense to separate "build system" dependencies from the
runtime dependencies.)

Cheers,

Loading...