Package Details: blockbench-bin 4.11.2-2

Git Clone URL: https://aur.archlinux.org/blockbench-bin.git (read-only, click to copy)
Package Base: blockbench-bin
Description: A low-poly 3D model editor
Upstream URL: https://blockbench.net
Licenses: GPL-3.0-or-later
Conflicts: blockbench
Provides: blockbench
Submitter: mrapplexz
Maintainer: Atakku (txtsd)
Last Packager: txtsd
Votes: 15
Popularity: 0.31
First Submitted: 2021-11-04 11:44 (UTC)
Last Updated: 2024-11-08 11:27 (UTC)

Latest Comments

1 2 3 Next › Last »

txtsd commented on 2024-11-10 02:54 (UTC) (edited on 2024-11-10 02:54 (UTC) by txtsd)

@Nyctfall Good deep dive! It's actually for an arcane dependency that Blockbench does not care to dispose of: electron-color-picker

See namcap output:

blockbench-bin W: Referenced library 'libgiblib.so.1' is an uninstalled dependency (needed in files ['opt/blockbench/resources/app.asar.unpacked/node_modules/electron-color-picker/library/linux/linux-scrot/scrot'])
blockbench-bin W: Referenced library 'libImlib2.so.1' is an uninstalled dependency (needed in files ['opt/blockbench/resources/app.asar.unpacked/node_modules/electron-color-picker/library/linux/linux-scrot/scrot'])

I don't actually use Blockbench, so idk if that particular dep is actively utilized or not, but it's better to have all the deps satisfied than not.

electron-color-picker is actually mentioned upstream in a PR. Perhaps you could file an issue to refresh the concern about it?
I've also filed an issue about upgrading deprecated deps. These things don't look like they're ever updated.

Nyctfall commented on 2024-11-09 17:01 (UTC)

Why is the giblib AUR package needed as a dependency? It appears to have previously been in the Community repo, until seemingly being orphaned at v1.2.4-8 on around 2022-04-01, when it was added to the AUR. The Sourceforge upstream for giblib-1.2.4.tar.gz was last modified on 2014-08-11, and the latest mention of the package on the forums was around 2010-2011.

I did some cursory research in the BlockBench GitHub repo, but I couldn't find any direct uses for feh, imlib2, or giblib. The entire project is a JavaScript based Electron app, so I assume it's for feh compatibility with imlib2 for file saving. But this package doesn't have feh as a dependency, so could it work without giblib?

txtsd commented on 2024-06-16 12:50 (UTC)

@mishashto Upstream only provides deb, rpm, and AppImages for Linux. If you want to build from source, use the blockbench package.

mishashto commented on 2024-06-16 08:55 (UTC)

Why does this use .deb as source? Can't you build it properly? It does not work on Arch installations out-of-the-box as it gives segmentation error, trying to find for deb/rpm distribution updates.

MithicSpirit commented on 2024-03-12 00:41 (UTC)

@furrykef also not a lawyer, but, from my understanding, the restrictions provided by the MIT license are a strict subset of those provided by the GPL3. That is, if you have access to code that is MIT-licensed, you are free to relicense it under the GPL3. Of course, this is not legal advice, and I'd recommend you contact a lawyer.

Either way, I think that the correct place to discuss this would be on their issue tracker, rather than on the AUR.

furrykef commented on 2024-03-11 22:28 (UTC)

I'm not a lawyer, but here's my understanding…

Since the MIT license is GPL compatible, switching a project's license from MIT to GPL is perfectly legitimate so long as the MIT license is properly followed for the contributions of developers who have not yet consented to the switch. That means a copy of the MIT license should be included and it should be made clear in some way which portions are MIT licensed and which are GPLed.

Unfortunately, Blockbench's devs aren't doing that, so (unless they did get everyone's consent) they are technically breaking the terms of the MIT license. However, in practice, few developers are likely to care, especially as long as older versions of the code are still available under the MIT license.

I think more important than the letter of the law here is the intent: someone who contributes to an MIT-licensed project clearly intends for their code to be usable in a GPLed project, since the MIT license and the GPL are compatible. That said, it'd still be nice if Blockbench properly followed the MIT license's terms.

MithicSpirit commented on 2024-03-11 06:25 (UTC) (edited on 2024-03-11 06:25 (UTC) by MithicSpirit)

@fluteyoshi debugedit is a dependency of base-devel, which is an implicit make dependency of every PKGBUILD, as per the wiki.

fluteyoshi commented on 2024-03-11 06:12 (UTC) (edited on 2024-03-11 06:12 (UTC) by fluteyoshi)

I noticed a bunch of "debugedit: command not found" errors during build on my machine, should debugedit be added as a build dependency?

txtsd commented on 2023-02-02 23:51 (UTC)

Updated the license and pushed the latest version.

MithicSpirit commented on 2023-02-02 20:13 (UTC)

@m4ksim it's very complicated (as legal things usually are), but in general the contributors maintain ownership over the code they write (unless otherwise stated; maybe there's something in github's ToS that does that?), so if you wish to relicense their code you'd need their permission. There's a lot more nuance to it than just that though.

1 2 3 Next › Last »