Package Details: auracle-git r427.33f9097-1

Git Clone URL: https://aur.archlinux.org/auracle-git.git (read-only, click to copy)
Package Base: auracle-git
Description: A flexible client for the AUR
Upstream URL: https://github.com/falconindy/auracle
Keywords: aur
Licenses: MIT
Conflicts: auracle
Provides: auracle
Submitter: Foxboron
Maintainer: artafinde (falconindy)
Last Packager: falconindy
Votes: 128
Popularity: 1.20
First Submitted: 2017-07-02 16:40 (UTC)
Last Updated: 2025-04-16 17:39 (UTC)

Required by (10)

Sources (1)

Pinned Comments

artafinde commented on 2022-01-26 09:15 (UTC) (edited on 2022-01-29 10:24 (UTC) by artafinde)

If the build fails:

  • Clear your aur helper cache and SRCPKGDEST directory
  • Rebuild in clean chroot 1
  • If it still fails, use a paste bin 2 to show full build logs

There's a package build already which you can try out from my repo.

falconindy commented on 2020-05-31 15:35 (UTC) (edited on 2025-04-28 14:23 (UTC) by falconindy)

FAQ:

  • If you think pod2man is missing, it's a configuration problem on your end. pod2man is part of the perl package, but in a perl-specific PATH handled by /etc/profile.d/perlbin.sh
  • I'm only able to test auracle on i686 and x86_64, so that's what I'm willing to commit to in the PKGBUILD. If you want to build this on some other architecture, use makepkg -A. The "any" architecture is reserved for packages with architecture independent files (and compiled C++ is not).

Latest Comments

« First ‹ Previous 1 .. 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Next › Last »

bartus commented on 2019-05-29 06:04 (UTC)

just dropping the --wipe flag to meson seams to fixes the issue.

SolarAquarion commented on 2019-05-29 03:01 (UTC)

I created a patch that doesn't fail http://ix.io/1KkF

Jesin commented on 2019-05-29 01:06 (UTC)

The new PKGBUILD is failing with this error: http://ix.io/1Kks

Jesin commented on 2019-05-28 19:42 (UTC)

You can get gcc9 by adding this before the first official repo in /etc/pacman.conf:

[gcc9]

Server = https://pkgbuild.com/~bpiotrowski/gcc9

falconindy commented on 2019-05-28 19:32 (UTC)

It's a gcc8 bug. You can compile with gcc9 (yanked from the repos) or with clang.

makepkg -C -- CXX=clang++

mrstobbe commented on 2019-05-28 19:14 (UTC)

aurcale upstream is currently borked with a compilation error about how a wrapped call is ambiguous. I swear it worked the other day when I was trying out Arch in a VM.

I tried going into its directory and checking out a previous commit, but it seems that makepkg just checks out the head again.

I'm 100% new to Arch (very fresh install), so I'm not sure what to do at this point. Is there a way to tell the build system to use a different commit while waiting for upstream to get fixed?

ThecaTTony commented on 2019-05-10 06:34 (UTC)

Thanks for the app and package. Can you please add aarch64 to supported arch's?

I successfully compiled and packaged on aarch64 for raspberry pi:

[thecattony@pilar auracle-git]$ sudo pacman -Ql auracle-git 
auracle-git /usr/
auracle-git /usr/bin/
auracle-git /usr/bin/auracle
auracle-git /usr/share/
auracle-git /usr/share/bash-completion/
auracle-git /usr/share/bash-completion/completions/
auracle-git /usr/share/bash-completion/completions/auracle
auracle-git /usr/share/licenses/
auracle-git /usr/share/licenses/auracle-git/
auracle-git /usr/share/licenses/auracle-git/LICENSE
auracle-git /usr/share/man/
auracle-git /usr/share/man/man1/
auracle-git /usr/share/man/man1/auracle.1.gz
auracle-git /usr/share/zsh/
auracle-git /usr/share/zsh/site-functions/
auracle-git /usr/share/zsh/site-functions/_auracle
[thecattony@pilar auracle-git]$ file /usr/bin/auracle
/usr/bin/auracle: ELF 64-bit LSB pie executable, ARM aarch64, version 1 (GNU/Linux), dynamically linked, interpreter /lib/ld-linux-aarch64.so.1, for GNU/Linux 3.7.0, BuildID[sha1]=c81ecd5d9d20fdfec9aecb0300c2bcb88174d407, stripped

falconindy commented on 2019-04-14 14:15 (UTC)

Well, --nocheck is a thing.

FTR, what terrible hardware is this running on? I assume it's some sort of ARM device? Tests are all subsecond for me. Do tests run any faster if you limit the number of processes to your cpu count? (--num-processes)