Package Details: chatterino2-bin 2.5.5-7

Git Clone URL: https://aur.archlinux.org/chatterino2-bin.git (read-only, click to copy)
Package Base: chatterino2-bin
Description: A chat client for Twitch.tv.
Upstream URL: https://github.com/chatterino/chatterino2
Licenses: MIT
Conflicts: chatterino
Provides: chatterino
Submitter: matthewq337
Maintainer: pajlada (chatterino2-ci, matthewq337)
Last Packager: pajlada
Votes: 9
Popularity: 2.20
First Submitted: 2024-07-15 00:20 (UTC)
Last Updated: 2026-05-16 09:15 (UTC)

Latest Comments

1 2 3 4 Next › Last »

pajlada commented on 2026-05-03 17:33 (UTC)

To be fair, with an update like this I should probably have waited a little bit to update.

Thanks for quickly confirming!

bk2 commented on 2026-05-03 14:33 (UTC)

There was an update to libstdc++ yesterday. Seems the mirror I've used was kind of delayed. Updated mirrorlist and now I have the same version. Chatterino works again.

Sorry for the noice and thanks for the information about my outdated libstdc++

bk2 commented on 2026-05-03 14:25 (UTC)

Here is my output:

Name            : libstdc++
Version         : 15.2.1+r604+g0b99615a8aef-1
Provides        : libstdc++.so=6-64
Depends On      : glibc>=2.27
[...]
Conflicts With  : None
Replaces        : None
Installed Size  : 2.57 MiB
Packager        : Frederik Schwan <freswa@archlinux.org>
Build Date      : Mon 09 Feb 2026 02:52:14 PM CET
Install Date    : Sun 15 Feb 2026 10:04:38 PM CET
Install Reason  : Installed as a dependency for another package

To be honest, I don't know why the versions could differ.

pajlada commented on 2026-05-03 14:18 (UTC)

@bk2: Can you confirm your installed version of libstdc++ with pacman -Qi libstdc++?

My output is

Name            : libstdc++
Version         : 16.1.1+r12+g301eb08fa2c5-1

I have spun up another build of the stable version just in case, but it works for me with an up-to-date system

bk2 commented on 2026-05-03 14:12 (UTC)

With the release to chatterino2-bin 2.5.5-6 I get: /usr/lib/libstdc++.so.6: version `GLIBCXX_3.4.35', but pacman -Syu states I'm already up to date.

pajlada commented on 2025-04-28 09:22 (UTC)

@oech3: Awesome to hear about the Full RELRO update

oech3 commented on 2025-04-28 09:16 (UTC)

Full RELRO was hidden since my STRIP_BINARIES of makepkg.conf was corrupted. Nothing to do.

pajlada commented on 2025-04-27 20:13 (UTC) (edited on 2025-04-27 20:14 (UTC) by pajlada)

Different build process may produce unbuildable AUR/chatterino2 and buildable AUR/chatterino2-bin at the same time.

Sorry, could you clarify what you mean by this? Both chatterino2 and chatterino2-bin use the provides=chatterino flag so they should be exclusive

By "I rename the files to look better in the GitHub releases" I mean I do that right now in CI, and have done so for the last release. I don't have any plans to rename them further. The release files in the Chatterino/pkg repo are not meant for direct consumption by users. They are meant as an intermediate tarball for consumption by AUR packages like this one.

What's blocking the Full RELRO check at the moment?

oech3 commented on 2025-04-27 19:31 (UTC)

Different build process may produce unbuildable AUR/chatterino2 and buildable AUR/chatterino2-bin at the same time.

I rename the files to look better in the GitHub releases

Thankyou. I recheck Full RELRO state after it.

pajlada commented on 2025-04-27 19:25 (UTC)

Please consider downstreaming those PKGBUILD to AUR.

I cannot easily downstream them to AUR if I want to customize the build process for CI (e.g. manually triggering a release for a specific release tag)

It cause confusing.

What's confusing about them? I'll explain what I can, or add comments to parts that are confusing

(Hmm... while docker image is Arch, why does namcap report source from GitHub corrupted?????)

namcap seems to rely on the package name matching what the .BUILDINFO or .PKGINFO file spit out. I rename the files to look better in the GitHub releases, since they're not meant for consumption via pacman

1 2 3 4 Next › Last »