[arch-general] definition of "orphan"

[Giancarlo Razzolini]

Em março 11, 2021 3:43 Matthias Bodenbinder via arch-general escreveu:
> Hi,
> 
> in the arch world I see two different definition of an "orphan".
> 
> The pacman manpage says:
> 
>     orphans - packages that were installed as dependencies 
>               but are no longer required by any installed package.
> 
> For the AUR the definition of an "orphan" is 
> 
>     If all maintainers of an AUR package disown it, it will 
>     become an "orphaned" package.
> (https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/AUR_submission_guidelines#Maintaining_packages
> )
> 
> This is confusing. Would it make sense to change the wording so that it
> is not ambiguous anymore.
> 

Your confusion comes from mixing the context of the package manager (pacman) in this case,
and the actual maintainership of packages, which is a different context.

So, both official packages [0] and AUR packages [1] can become orphans in the sense they don't have
a maintainer anymore.

This is different from the orphan in the context of a package manager. As long as you don't conflate
both contexts, it's very easy to understand the differences between these orphans.

Regards,
Giancarlo Razzolini

[0] https://archlinux.org/packages/?sort=&q=&maintainer=orphan&flagged=
[1] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/?O=0&SeB=nd&K=&outdated=&SB=n&SO=a&PP=50&do_Orphans=Orphans
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-general/attachments/20210311/1e8f18b5/attachment.sig>