Package Details: browserstack-local-x64 8.9-0

Git Clone URL: https://aur.archlinux.org/browserstack-local-x64.git (read-only, click to copy)
Package Base: browserstack-local-x64
Description: BrowserStack Local Testing binary - 64bit
Upstream URL: https://www.browserstack.com/local-testing/
Licenses: Commercial
Conflicts: browserstack-local-x32
Submitter: infabo
Maintainer: cjayross
Last Packager: cjayross
Votes: 2
Popularity: 0.000000
First Submitted: 2020-05-18 08:33 (UTC)
Last Updated: 2023-07-25 17:37 (UTC)

Latest Comments

« First ‹ Previous 1 2

samhh commented on 2022-02-06 22:24 (UTC)

@infabo Are you sure? I've just directly cloned and run makepkg -i and it's still failing. The sha512sum looks like it should be:

396c7f1ac9e1f399cf1b4a961e2c17f724a64c23feee12191850501552f92f54acb1032fe6fa703aee6f982d351a506b7742cf04d276cfe9520d390d0337043a

infabo commented on 2022-02-01 18:09 (UTC)

Can't reproduce. Installs perfectly fine fresh from AUR.

samhh commented on 2022-01-31 23:25 (UTC)

FYI I'm seeing a failing validity check on 8.4-0.

infabo commented on 2022-01-31 08:27 (UTC)

I know this specific convention about suffixes. Since there is only a binary and no source-code or development-version (which may needs compiling) for BrowserStackLocal available, one does not need to use these suffixes. I know many AUR packages, that do not use a "-bin" suffix - even though the package clearly does not compile anything and just uses some prebuilt binary.

On the one with 32 or 64bit: yeah, I fully agree. I decided to use the "architecture" property of PKGBUILD for that. Maybe a decision on $CARCH may work as well. I did not want to fiddle with it, as I do not have any 32bit system around for testing that condition.

mephinet commented on 2021-09-15 15:06 (UTC)

Shouldn't this package be called browserstack-local-bin, and install either the 32 or 64bit version, depending on the machine?

gpoole commented on 2020-10-06 05:56 (UTC)

+1 to please update the sums, this is currently failing to install with "One or more files did not pass the validity check!"

efernandes commented on 2020-06-09 09:36 (UTC)

Hi!

Please update sha512sum field.

Thanks!

« First ‹ Previous 1 2