Packages

Cannot mix incompatible Qt library (version 0×50800) with this library (version 0×50904)
Aborted

./Nextcloud-2.3.3-x86_64.AppImage: /usr/lib/libQt5Core.so.5: version `Qt_5.9’ not found (required by /tmp/.mount_NextclpprMnG/usr/bin/../lib/libqt5keychain.so.1

These two packages are directly affected by an older qt5...

Could you update all the qt packages to the LTS version available?

PKGBUILD

# $Id: PKGBUILD 187611 2016-08-26 15:44:01Z bisson $
# Contributor: lp76 <l.peduto@gmail.com>
# Contributor: Daenyth <Daenyth+Arch AT gmail DOT com>
# Maintainer: Gaetan Bisson <bisson@archlinux.org>

pkgname=ncdu
pkgver=1.12
pkgrel=1.hyperbola1
pkgdesc='Disk usage analyzer with an ncurses interface'
url='https://dev.yorhel.nl/ncdu'
license=('custom:MIT')
depends=('ncurses')
arch=('i686' 'x86_64')
validpgpkeys=('74460D32B80810EBA9AFA2E962394C698C2739FA')
source=("https://dev.yorhel.nl/download/${pkgname}-${pkgver}.tar.gz"{,.asc})
sha512sums=('20620dd79d2af878442769e097f13806f64f23875dcb85ebccd573a3de43aba5663d496049b64015d13f9a79d624298032c008ef61dfb6f61d8b12902b8dca12'
            'SKIP')

build() {
    cd "${srcdir}/${pkgname}-${pkgver}"
    ./configure --prefix=/usr
    make
}

package() {
    cd "${srcdir}/${pkgname}-${pkgver}"
    make DESTDIR="${pkgdir}" install
    install -Dm644 COPYING "${pkgdir}/usr/share/licenses/${pkgname}/LICENSE"
}

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/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