[aur-general] PKGBUILD Help
Hi, I thought I had this stuff all figured out lol. This one is proving me wrong. It's failing to build, saying it can't find the file/directory, but it's clearly there. Can someone please let me know what I've done wrong? Thanks Storm -- Registered Linux user number 508465: https://linuxcounter.net/user/508465.html My blog, Thoughts of a Dragon: http://www.stormdragon.us/ Get paid to read email: http://is.gd/feRiB "Listen up to ancient tales of monsters, zombies, ghosts 'bout creatures rising from the graves to haunt the living world" The Other - Beware of Ghouls
1. You get the path wrong. install -m755 "src/sndup-linux" "$pkgdir/usr/bin" should be install -m755 "sndup" "$pkgdir/usr/bin" 2. Please don't do the git clone/pull stuff manually, use the pacman 4.1 style instead: source=(git://github.com/stormdragon2976/sndup-linux.git) and omit the whole build() 3. WTFPL is not a common license, you need to grab it and put inside the package. Regards, Felix Yan
Hi, Thanks for the help. I did your suggestions and all works, except I get this error: ==> ERROR: Integrity checks are missing. But, because this is a git package that will be updated, and doesn't really have a stable release, it's kind of hard to keep up with the checksum. Is there a way to get it to skip them? Also, can I just put a link to the wtfpl license in the license part of the PKGBUILD? Thanks Storm On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 05:29 AM, Felix Yan <felixonmars@gmail.com> wrote:
from: Felix Yan <felixonmars@gmail.com> date: Tue, Sep 17 05:29 PM +08:00 2013 to: "Discussion about the Arch User Repository (AUR)" <aur-general@archlinux.org> reply-to: "Discussion about the Arch User Repository \(AUR\)" <aur-general@archlinux.org> subject: Re: [aur-general] PKGBUILD Help
1. You get the path wrong.
install -m755 "src/sndup-linux" "$pkgdir/usr/bin"
should be
install -m755 "sndup" "$pkgdir/usr/bin"
2. Please don't do the git clone/pull stuff manually, use the pacman 4.1 style instead:
source=(git://github.com/stormdragon2976/sndup-linux.git)
and omit the whole build()
3. WTFPL is not a common license, you need to grab it and put inside the package.
Regards, Felix Yan -- Registered Linux user number 508465: https://linuxcounter.net/user/508465.html My blog, Thoughts of a Dragon: http://www.stormdragon.us/ Do you get paid for tweeting? I do: http://spn.tw/r11uj "I dole out justice with the tip of my boot. It's got a logic that you just can't refute." Moxy Fruvous - Kick in the Ass
ti, 2013-09-17 kello 06:44 -0400, Storm Dragon kirjoitti:
Hi, Thanks for the help. I did your suggestions and all works, except I get this error: ==> ERROR: Integrity checks are missing. But, because this is a git package that will be updated, and doesn't really have a stable release, it's kind of hard to keep up with the checksum. Is there a way to get it to skip them? Also, can I just put a link to the wtfpl license in the license part of the PKGBUILD?
md5sums=('SKIP') You need to copy the license file to "${pkgdir}/usr/share/license/${pkgname}"
Den 17-09-2013 11:18, Storm Dragon skrev:
I thought I had this stuff all figured out lol.
Looks like you've already been helped out quite a bit, so I'll just chime in to add this: Use https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/VCS_PKGBUILD_Guidelines instead of PKGBUILD-git.proto. The -git.proto file is outdated (I could have sworn there was a ticket about this on the bug tracker, but I can't find it now) and shouldn't be followed at the moment. Also, look over the rest of the PKGBUILD guidelines and documentation on the Wiki. (About the WTFPL - assuming they (you?) are using the license "correctly", it will include a '© Author' as the 3rd or 4th or so line, which is why the WTFPL isn't among the generically added licenses: https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/33664 ) -- Cheers, Frederik "Freso" S. Olesen <http://freso.dk/>
On 09/17/2013 06:51 PM, Frederik "Freso" S. Olesen wrote:
Den 17-09-2013 11:18, Storm Dragon skrev:
I thought I had this stuff all figured out lol.
Looks like you've already been helped out quite a bit, so I'll just chime in to add this: Use https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/VCS_PKGBUILD_Guidelines instead of PKGBUILD-git.proto. The -git.proto file is outdated (I could have sworn there was a ticket about this on the bug tracker, but I can't find it now) and shouldn't be followed at the moment.
Also, look over the rest of the PKGBUILD guidelines and documentation on the Wiki.
(About the WTFPL - assuming they (you?) are using the license "correctly", it will include a '© Author' as the 3rd or 4th or so line, which is why the WTFPL isn't among the generically added licenses: https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/33664 )
@WTFPL As far as I understand it, the copyright statement on the fourth line of the license is regarding the license text itself and means Sam Hocevar holds the copyright on the license text and not the software you ship the license with. Therefor when you use the WTFPL you usually slap a second copyright statement above the actual license text and which regards your software as described here [0] in "How do I use the WTFPL" and "Can you explain the WTFPL terms to me?". But I could be wrong, licenses are weird. [0] http://www.wtfpl.net/faq/
On Tue, 17 Sep 2013 19:35:52 +0200 ponder@creshal.de wrote:
On 09/17/2013 06:51 PM, Frederik "Freso" S. Olesen wrote:
Den 17-09-2013 11:18, Storm Dragon skrev:
I thought I had this stuff all figured out lol.
Looks like you've already been helped out quite a bit, so I'll just chime in to add this: Use https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/VCS_PKGBUILD_Guidelines instead of PKGBUILD-git.proto. The -git.proto file is outdated (I could have sworn there was a ticket about this on the bug tracker, but I can't find it now) and shouldn't be followed at the moment.
Also, look over the rest of the PKGBUILD guidelines and documentation on the Wiki.
(About the WTFPL - assuming they (you?) are using the license "correctly", it will include a '© Author' as the 3rd or 4th or so line, which is why the WTFPL isn't among the generically added licenses: https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/33664 )
@WTFPL As far as I understand it, the copyright statement on the fourth line of the license is regarding the license text itself and means Sam Hocevar holds the copyright on the license text and not the software you ship the license with. Therefor when you use the WTFPL you usually slap a second copyright statement above the actual license text and which regards your software as described here [0] in "How do I use the WTFPL" and "Can you explain the WTFPL terms to me?".
But I could be wrong, licenses are weird.
FWIW, I agree with ponder - the author's Copyright doesn't go into the license file any more than it does with the GPL. Just where you, as the software author, specify the license, you point it to the WTFPL COPYING file. The person who closed the bug seems to be confused. -- Jonathan Arnold Webstream: http://hieronymus.soup.io Talent wins games, but team work and intelligence wins championships. Michael Jordan
participants (6)
-
Felix Yan
-
Frederik "Freso" S. Olesen
-
Jesse Juhani Jaara
-
Jonathan Arnold
-
ponder＠creshal.de
-
Storm Dragon