All Projects

Description:
Hyperbola has the following SPF implementations:
* libspf2
* perl-mail-spf
* perl-mail-spf-query

However, none of them work out of the box with postfix. There’s postfix-policyd-spf-perl, which uses one the current perl implementations (perl-mail-spf), takes no time to build and all the dependencies are already satisfied with Hyperbola’s packages

Here I made a PKGBUILD that’s compliant with the packaging standards:

pkgname=postfix-policyd-spf-perl
pkgver=2.011
pkgrel=1
pkgdesc='Postfix SPF policy engine, written in Perl'
arch=(i686 x86_64)
url='https://launchpad.net/postfix-policyd-spf-perl/'
license=(GPL)
depends=(perl-mail-spf perl-netaddr-ip perl-sys-hostname-long)
source=("https://launchpad.net/postfix-policyd-spf-perl/trunk/${pkgver}/+download/${pkgname}-${pkgver}.tar.gz"{,.asc})
sha512sums=('22fc00bf74912056a67e937a460ac1fd878f1cb1a3bfa7b19bc5f1e6bc1c36d815dcf8c945e818d242ed5e72a6295bb0e1569446e06b09aefb2842993b8016ba'
            'SKIP')
validpgpkeys=(E7729BFFBE85400FEEEE23B178D7DEFB9AD59AF1) # Scott Kitterman

package() {
  cd "${pkgname}-${pkgver}"

  install -Dm755 "${pkgname}" "${pkgdir}/usr/libexec/postfix/${pkgname}"
  install -Dm644 CHANGES INSTALL README -t "${pkgdir}/usr/share/doc/${pkgname}"
  install -Dm644 LICENSE "${pkgdir}/usr/share/licenses/${pkgname}/LICENSE"
}

in the other hand, to give users the possibility of having more options, we could add pypolicyd-spf (AUR), which depends in pyspf (AUR) and other packages that Hyperbola has. In fact, ArchWiki talks about this implementation, but this might not be relevant.

Description:
The title says everything

Also, it doesn’t follow the FHS (/usr/bin/postgrey should be in /usr/sbin)

Additional info:
* postgrey-1.37-1

Two formats (including HTML and PHP) are provided to run semi-libre/free web browser Mozilla Firefox in the original code base, but it currently got blacklisted due to numerous branding, security and privacy issues, and replaced by the Hyperbola Iceweasel-UXP. To replace existing strings at the web section in xferc.in:

html = "iceweasel-uxp,iceweasel-uxp,<txteditor>;Hyper Text;html_32x32.png;html_16x16.png;;"
htm = "iceweasel-uxp,iceweasel-uxp,<txteditor>;Hyper Text;html_32x32.png;html_16x16.png;;"
php = "iceweasel-uxp,iceweasel-uxp,<txteditor>;PHP Source;html_32x32.png;html_16x16.png;;"

As even the support for GCC 7 is now ending with the release of version 7.5 (https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2019-11/msg00099.html) I’d like to propose a renewal of the building-stack - which I think is also needed in time. Also a renewal of the glibc would be good at all!

It happened already with minetest and again with prosody: When trying to build own packages with makepkg there are patches downloaded from the Debian-project. But the given HTTP(S)-sources are no longer available, concrete example within prosody to be found: https://deb.debian.org/debian/pool/main/p/prosody/prosody_0.10.2-1~bpo9+1.debian.tar.xz (not available)

Please don’t rely on those external sources when creating PKGBUILD-files or just give users the possibility for a secure and granted download. Therefore I cannot build prosody on my own now!

Description:
linphonec is unusable because a error produce a continuous log

Additional info:
linphone 3.11.1-1.hyperbola1

Steps to reproduce:
linphonec

Log:
linphonec> 2019-12-15 19:25:58:010 ortp-error-Error in connect: Network is unreachable
2019-12-15 19:26:03:012 ortp-error-Error in connect: Network is unreachable
2019-12-15 19:26:08:018 ortp-error-Error in connect: Network is unreachable
2019-12-15 19:26:13:013 ortp-error-Error in connect: Network is unreachable
2019-12-15 19:26:18:016 ortp-error-Error in connect: Network is unreachable
2019-12-15 19:26:23:014 ortp-error-Error in connect: Network is unreachable
2019-12-15 19:26:28:010 ortp-error-Error in connect: Network is unreachable
2019-12-15 19:26:33:010 ortp-error-Error in connect: Network is unreachable
2019-12-15 19:26:38:012 ortp-error-Error in connect: Network is unreachable
2019-12-15 19:26:43:015 ortp-error-Error in connect: Network is unreachable
2019-12-15 19:26:48:010 ortp-error-Error in connect: Network is unreachable
2019-12-15 19:26:53:010 ortp-error-Error in connect: Network is unreachable

The Mailling list don't work : https://lists.hyperbola.info//mailman/listinfo/

CHDKPTP is part of CHDK project - a free software firmware add-on for Canon cameras. It enables controlling Canon cameras via the computer.

Attached is a modified iup PKGBUILD (Lua 5.3 build was removed as it failed to compile) and configuration files for chdkptp.

Code is available via svn:

$ svn co http://subversion.assembla.com/svn/chdkptp/trunk chdkptp

Copy chdkptp.sh and config.mk files to source tree then compile via make. chdkptp requires root privileges to connect to a camera.

aqemu only lists GNU/Linux and GNU/Hurd. Since LibertyBSD is also free it should also be added.

Cinnamon currently does not support elogind, and depends on systemd. A patch is needed to fix this issue.

http://scidvspc.sourceforge.net/

«Unlike most chess engines, Stockfish is open source (GPL license). That means you can read the code, modify it, contribute back, and even use it in your own projects.» I do not know if it is libre. If it is, together with Scid, Hyperbola is one step closer for every chess lover out there who also loves freedom!
https://stockfishchess.org/

This package contains vague terminology “Open Source”:

extra/aiksaurus 1.2.1-5
    A cross-platform, open-source thesaurus

According to:
https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html

We shall avoid vague terminology such as “Open Source”, please see here:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Open

It would be good example to set to have proper description of packages without using “Open Source”.

eg.

A cross-platform, free-software thesaurus

This package contains vague terminology “Open Source”:

extra/assimp 3.3.1-1
    Portable Open Source library to import various well-known 3D model formats in an uniform manner

According to:
https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html

We shall avoid vague terminology such as “Open Source”, please see here:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Open

It would be good example to set to have proper description of packages without using “Open Source”.

eg.

Portable Free Software library to import various well-known 3D model formats in an uniform manner

This package contains vague terminology “Open Source”:

extra/cmake 3.8.0-1
    A cross-platform open-source make system

According to:
https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html

We shall avoid vague terminology such as “Open Source”, please see here:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Open

It would be good example to set to have proper description of packages without using “Open Source”.

eg.

A cross-platform free-software make system

This package contains vague terminology “Open Source”:

extra/gstreamer 1.12.0-1
    GStreamer open-source multimedia framework core library

According to:
https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html

We shall avoid vague terminology such as “Open Source”, please see here:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Open

It would be good example to set to have proper description of packages without using “Open Source”.

eg.

GStreamer free-software multimedia framework core library

This package contains vague terminology “Open Source”:

extra/java-openjfx 8.u121-1
    Java OpenJFX 8 client application platform (open-source implementation of JavaFX)

According to:
https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html

We shall avoid vague terminology such as “Open Source”, please see here:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Open

It would be good example to set to have proper description of packages without using “Open Source”.

eg.

Java OpenJFX 8 client application platform (free-software implementation of JavaFX)

This package contains vague terminology “Open Source”:

extra/java-openjfx-doc 8.u121-1
    Java OpenJFX 8 client application platform (open-source implementation of JavaFX) - documentation

According to:
https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html

We shall avoid vague terminology such as “Open Source”, please see here:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Open

It would be good example to set to have proper description of packages without using “Open Source”.

eg.

Java OpenJFX 8 client application platform (free-software implementation of JavaFX) - documentation

This package contains vague terminology “Open Source”:

extra/java-openjfx-src 8.u121-1
    Java OpenJFX 8 client application platform (open-source implementation of JavaFX) - sources

According to:
https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html

We shall avoid vague terminology such as “Open Source”, please see here:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Open

It would be good example to set to have proper description of packages without using “Open Source”.

eg.

Java OpenJFX 8 client application platform (free-software implementation of JavaFX) - sources

This package contains vague terminology “Open Source”:

extra/kdegames-kigo 17.04.0-1 (kde-applications kdegames)
    An open-source implementation of the popular Go game

According to:
https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html

We shall avoid vague terminology such as “Open Source”, please see here:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Open

It would be good example to set to have proper description of packages without using “Open Source”.

eg.

A free-software implementation of the popular Go game

This package contains vague terminology “Open Source”:

extra/libgdiplus 4.2-1
    An Open Source Implementation of the GDI+ API

According to:
https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html

We shall avoid vague terminology such as “Open Source”, please see here:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Open

It would be good example to set to have proper description of packages without using “Open Source”.

eg.

A Free Software Implementation of the GDI+ API

This package contains vague terminology “Open Source”:

extra/libical 2.0.0-2
    An open source reference implementation of the icalendar data type and serialization format

According to:
https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html

We shall avoid vague terminology such as “Open Source”, please see here:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Open

It would be good example to set to have proper description of packages without using “Open Source”.

eg.

A free software reference implementation of the icalendar data type and serialization format

This package contains vague terminology “Open Source”:

extra/liblouis 3.0.0-2
    Open-source braille translator and back-translator

According to:
https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html

We shall avoid vague terminology such as “Open Source”, please see here:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Open

It would be good example to set to have proper description of packages without using “Open Source”.

eg.

Free-software braille translator and back-translator

This package contains vague terminology “Open Source”:

extra/libofa 0.9.3-6
    An open-source audio fingerprint by MusicIP

According to:
https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html

We shall avoid vague terminology such as “Open Source”, please see here:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Open

It would be good example to set to have proper description of packages without using “Open Source”.

eg.

A free-software audio fingerprint by MusicIP

This package contains vague terminology “Open Source”:

extra/libomxil-bellagio 0.9.3-1
    An opensource implementation of the OpenMAX Integration Layer API

According to:
https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html

We shall avoid vague terminology such as “Open Source”, please see here:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Open

It would be good example to set to have proper description of packages without using “Open Source”.

eg.

A free software implementation of the OpenMAX Integration Layer API

This package contains vague terminology “Open Source”:

extra/libupnp 1.6.21-1
    Portable Open Source UPnP Development Kit

According to:
https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html

We shall avoid vague terminology such as “Open Source”, please see here:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Open

It would be good example to set to have proper description of packages without using “Open Source”.

eg.

Portable Free Software UPnP Development Kit

This package contains vague terminology “Open Source”:

extra/mlt 6.4.1-6
    An open source multimedia framework

According to:
https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html

We shall avoid vague terminology such as “Open Source”, please see here:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Open

It would be good example to set to have proper description of packages without using “Open Source”.

eg.

A free software multimedia framework

This package contains vague terminology “Open Source”:

extra/mlt-python-bindings 6.4.1-6
    An open source multimedia framework

According to:
https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html

We shall avoid vague terminology such as “Open Source”, please see here:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Open

It would be good example to set to have proper description of packages without using “Open Source”.

eg.

A free software multimedia framework

This package contains vague terminology “Open Source”:

extra/opencore-amr 0.1.5-1
    Open source implementation of the Adaptive Multi Rate (AMR) speech codec

According to:
https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html

We shall avoid vague terminology such as “Open Source”, please see here:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Open

It would be good example to set to have proper description of packages without using “Open Source”.

eg.

extra/opencore-amr 0.1.5-1
    Free software implementation of the Adaptive Multi Rate (AMR) speech codec

This package contains vague terminology “Open Source”:

extra/openjpeg 1.5.2-1
    An open source JPEG 2000 codec

According to:
https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html

We shall avoid vague terminology such as “Open Source”, please see here:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Open

It would be good example to set to have proper description of packages without using “Open Source”.

eg.

A free software JPEG 2000 codec

This package contains vague terminology “Open Source”:

extra/openjpeg2 2.1.2-2
    An open source JPEG 2000 codec, version 2.1.2

According to:
https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html

We shall avoid vague terminology such as “Open Source”, please see here:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Open

It would be good example to set to have proper description of packages without using “Open Source”.

eg.

A free software JPEG 2000 codec, version 2.1.2

This package contains vague terminology “Open Source”:

extra/sofia-sip 1.12.11-3
    An open-source SIP User-Agent library

According to:
https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html

We shall avoid vague terminology such as “Open Source”, please see here:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Open

It would be good example to set to have proper description of packages without using “Open Source”.

eg.

A free-software SIP User-Agent library

This package contains vague terminology “Open Source”:

extra/swt 4.6.2-3
    An open source widget toolkit for Java

According to:
https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html

We shall avoid vague terminology such as “Open Source”, please see here:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Open

It would be good example to set to have proper description of packages without using “Open Source”.

eg.

A free software widget toolkit for Java

This package contains vague terminology “Open Source”:

extra/tomcat7 7.0.76-1
    Open source implementation of the Java Servlet 3.0 and JavaServer Pages 2.2 technologies

According to:
https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html

We shall avoid vague terminology such as “Open Source”, please see here:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Open

It would be good example to set to have proper description of packages without using “Open Source”.

eg.

Free software implementation of the Java Servlet 3.0 and JavaServer Pages 2.2 technologies

This package contains vague terminology “Open Source”:

extra/tomcat8 8.0.42-1
    Open source implementation of the Java Servlet 3.1 and JavaServer Pages 2.3 technologies

According to:
https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html

We shall avoid vague terminology such as “Open Source”, please see here:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Open

It would be good example to set to have proper description of packages without using “Open Source”.

eg.

Free software implementation of the Java Servlet 3.1 and JavaServer Pages 2.3 technologies

This package contains vague terminology “Open Source”:

extra/unixodbc 2.3.4-2
    ODBC is an open specification for providing application developers with a predictable API with which to access Data Sources

According to:
https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html

We shall avoid vague terminology such as “Open Source”, please see here:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Open

It would be good example to set to have proper description of packages without using “Open Source”.

eg.

ODBC is a free specification for providing application developers with a predictable API with which to access Data Sources

This package contains vague terminology “Open Source”:

extra/wildmidi 0.4.0-1
    Open Source MIDI Synthesizer

According to:
https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html

We shall avoid vague terminology such as “Open Source”, please see here:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Open

It would be good example to set to have proper description of packages without using “Open Source”.

eg.

Free Software MIDI Synthesizer

This package contains vague terminology “Open Source”:

extra/x265 2.4-1
    Open Source H265/HEVC video encoder

According to:
https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html

We shall avoid vague terminology such as “Open Source”, please see here:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Open

It would be good example to set to have proper description of packages without using “Open Source”.

eg.

Free Software H265/HEVC video encoder

This package contains vague terminology “Open Source”:

extra/xapian-core 1:1.4.2-1
    Open source search engine library.

According to:
https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html

We shall avoid vague terminology such as “Open Source”, please see here:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Open

It would be good example to set to have proper description of packages without using “Open Source”.

eg.

Free software search engine library.

This package contains vague terminology “Open Source”:

extra/xsd 4.0.0-2
    An open-source, cross-platform W3C XML Schema to C++ data binding compiler

According to:
https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html

We shall avoid vague terminology such as “Open Source”, please see here:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Open

It would be good example to set to have proper description of packages without using “Open Source”.

eg.

A free-software, cross-platform W3C XML Schema to C++ data binding compiler

This package contains vague terminology “Open Source”:

extra/xvidcore 1.3.4-1 [installed]
    XviD is an open source MPEG-4 video codec

According to:
https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html

We shall avoid vague terminology such as “Open Source”, please see here:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Open

It would be good example to set to have proper description of packages without using “Open Source”.

eg.

XviD is a free software MPEG-4 video codec

This package contains vague terminology “Open Source”:

community/beignet 1.3.1-2
    An open source OpenCL implementation for Intel IvyBridge+ iGPUs

According to:
https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html

We shall avoid vague terminology such as “Open Source”, please see here:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Open

It would be good example to set to have proper description of packages without using “Open Source”.

eg.

A free software OpenCL implementation for Intel IvyBridge+ iGPUs

This package contains vague terminology “Open Source”:

community/bzrtp 1.0.5-1
    Opensource implementation of ZRTP keys exchange protocol

According to:
https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html

We shall avoid vague terminology such as “Open Source”, please see here:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Open

It would be good example to set to have proper description of packages without using “Open Source”.

eg.

Free software implementation of ZRTP keys exchange protocol

This package contains vague terminology “Open Source”:

community/cimg 1.7.1-1
    Open-source C++ toolkit for image processing

According to:
https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html

We shall avoid vague terminology such as “Open Source”, please see here:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Open

It would be good example to set to have proper description of packages without using “Open Source”.

eg.

Free-software C++ toolkit for image processing

This package contains vague terminology “Open Source”:

community/displaycal 3.2.4.0-1
    Open Source Display Calibration and Characterization powered by Argyll CMS (Formerly known as dispcalGUI)

According to:
https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html

We shall avoid vague terminology such as “Open Source”, please see here:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Open

It would be good example to set to have proper description of packages without using “Open Source”.

eg.

Free Software Display Calibration and Characterization powered by Argyll CMS (Formerly known as dispcalGUI)

This package contains vague terminology “Open Source”:

community/dokuwiki 20170219_b-1
    Simple to use and highly versatile Open Source wiki software

According to:
https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html

We shall avoid vague terminology such as “Open Source”, please see here:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Open

It would be good example to set to have proper description of packages without using “Open Source”.

eg.

Simple to use and highly versatile free wiki software

This package contains vague terminology “Open Source”:

community/dsdp 5.8-1
    A free open source implementation of an interior-point method for semidefinite programming

According to:
https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html

We shall avoid vague terminology such as “Open Source”, please see here:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Open

It would be good example to set to have proper description of packages without using “Open Source”.

eg.

A free software implementation of an interior-point method for semidefinite programming

This package contains vague terminology “Open Source”:

community/dspam 3.10.2-14
    A scalable, open-source statistical anti-spam filter

According to:
https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html

We shall avoid vague terminology such as “Open Source”, please see here:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Open

It would be good example to set to have proper description of packages without using “Open Source”.

eg.

A scalable, free-software statistical anti-spam filter

This package contains vague terminology “Open Source” and “Linux”:

community/fcitx-mozc 2.20.2673.102-2
    Fcitx Module of A Japanese Input Method for Chromium OS, Windows, Mac and Linux (the Open Source Edition of Google Japanese Input)

According to:
https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html

We shall avoid vague terminology such as “Open Source” and “Linux” as operating system, please see here:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Open https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Linux

It would be good example to set to have proper description of packages without using “Open Source” and “Linux” as operating system. Also it should avoid contains nonfree OSs in its description.

eg.

Fcitx Module of A Japanese Input Method for GNU/Linux (the Free Software Edition of Google Japanese Input)

This package contains vague terminology “Open Source”:

community/flightgear 2017.1.3-1
    An open-source, multi-platform flight simulator

According to:
https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html

We shall avoid vague terminology such as “Open Source”, please see here:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Open

It would be good example to set to have proper description of packages without using “Open Source”.

eg.

A free-software, multi-platform flight simulator