Package Details: bitwarden_rs 1.4.0-1

Git Clone URL: https://aur.archlinux.org/bitwarden_rs.git (read-only)
Package Base: bitwarden_rs
Description: An unofficial lightweight implementation of the bitwarden-server using rust and sqlite. Does NOT include the web-interface.
Upstream URL: https://github.com/dani-garcia/bitwarden_rs
Keywords: bitwarden manager password passwordmanager rust selfhosted server
Licenses: GPL3
Conflicts: bitwarden_rs-git
Submitter: mqs
Maintainer: mqs
Last Packager: mqs
Votes: 5
Popularity: 1.879030
First Submitted: 2018-07-13 15:29
Last Updated: 2018-11-14 19:09

Latest Comments

mqs commented on 2018-09-23 15:16

@ChrisMorgan Fixed, thanks!

Edit: v1.2.0 was just released, working on it

ChrisMorgan commented on 2018-09-23 13:33

Now failing to build because https://github.com/tyranron/lettre?branch=upgrade-to-native-tls-0-2#644b1e59 doesn’t exist.

I’ve requested a new upstream release 1.1.1 to go with openssl 1.1.1.

mqs commented on 2018-09-20 15:14

Sorry, I thought I might be the only one having those problems and wanted to wait till someone says something.

I'll try the openssl1.1.1 branch and will include a patch if it works, if it doesn't, i'll workaround by using openssl1.0 (I already tested that but didn't want to "downgrade" the openssl version from 1.1.0 to 1.0.2 for eceryone unless neccessary)

Edit:pushed an update, roughly equivalent to the upstream openssl-fix - commit. This will tell cargo to use more recent versions of lettre, native-tls and reqwest, resulting in rust-openssl using openssl v1.1.1 .

ChrisMorgan commented on 2018-09-20 13:54

bitwarden_rs 1.1.0 won’t build with OpenSSL 1.1.1, and the core repository updated openssl to 1.1.1-1 a day before you released bitwarden_rs 1.1.0-1 here (I guess you hadn’t updated before pushing).

https://github.com/dani-garcia/bitwarden_rs/issues/193 is tracking unbreaking OpenSSL 1.1.1.

I guess you could patch it somehow, but I wouldn’t bother; it’ll probably be sorted out fairly quickly. Any new users should just install the previous release instead.

mqs commented on 2018-09-07 11:02

I'm using the naming conventions described here: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch_User_Repository#What_is_the_difference_between_foo_and_foo-git_packages.3F TLDR: -git packages always point to the latest developer commit, but are not checksummed and usually don't get updated by your aur helper.

bitwarden_rs (without -git) uses the latest version from here: https://github.com/dani-garcia/bitwarden_rs/releases .

Unless you know better I would recommend to install this package.

EDIT:(You can gently remind upstream to release again if there are some features/fixes you want to get here ;) )

dobunzli commented on 2018-09-07 10:48

Thanks for this.

Can I ask why there are two repository for bitwarden_rs i.e. "bitwarden_rs" and "bitwarden_rs-git" ? And which is the best to use ? I used "bitwarden_rs" for my installation.

What is the best way to keep my installation updated with the original source https://github.com/dani-garcia/bitwarden_rs ? I have seen that they were a few commits since this version.

mqs commented on 2018-07-26 06:27

https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch_packaging_standards#Directories says "If there is more than one configuration file, it is customary to use a subdirectory in order to keep the /etc area as clean as possible."

so as there is only one file, i chose not to create a folder. But if someone else shares your pov then i wouldn't mind changing this.

ChrisMorgan commented on 2018-07-26 03:48

It’s conventional to use a directory inside /etc even if it’s only one file. I recommend moving /etc/bitwarden_rs.env to /etc/bitwarden_rs/env.

Other than that: thanks for this, I was expecting to have to do it myself, a couple of weeks back, and was going to get to it in a few days’ time. Now I don’t have to! ☺