undefined | Better HN

0 pointsjolmg9d ago0 comments

> If it's a binary package, how do you do that?

You find one that builds from source, or you still review PKGBUILD and friends and lean more on evaluating the reputation of upstream and its maintainers, or you simply decide never to install binary packages. Your policy is yours to decide.

> Putting this on users is not a tenable solution.

The alternative would be to not have an AUR. Archlinux has official package repos where packages are vetted. The AUR (Arch User Repository) is not that. The AUR is there to provide greater variety of software than the official repos can, and it does that by not incurring the cost of being individually maintained by volunteer Arch staff and developers. It needs to not incur that cost for it to exist, otherwise it'd just be the official repos. It's like github, but limited to repos with PKGBUILDs.

0 comments

2 comments · 2 top-level

embedding-shape9d ago

> The alternative would be to not have an AUR

And in this alternative past/future, everyone is using GitHub to host their PKGBUILDs instead, then someone gets tired/lazy and builds one repository that indexes those, and we have ArchPacBrewRepository or something, and very same issue appears again, unless people change their approach to installing random 3rd party software.

Gigachad8d ago

The AUR being hosted by the Arch project on the same domain gives an air of authority and reputation to it which is misleading.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse