Thanks for the report, mpz. The GCC6 incompatibility is (hopefully) fixed in the new release.
Search Criteria
Package Details: enigma_sdl 1.21-2
| Git Clone URL: | https://aur.archlinux.org/enigma_sdl.git (read-only) |
|---|---|
| Package Base: | enigma_sdl |
| Description: | Puzzle game inspired by Oxyd on the Atari ST and Rock'n'Roll on the Amiga. |
| Upstream URL: | http://www.nongnu.org/enigma/ |
| Licenses: | |
| Submitter: | ngaba |
| Maintainer: | ngaba |
| Last Packager: | ngaba |
| Votes: | 39 |
| Popularity: | 0.022074 |
| First Submitted: | 2005-12-14 14:11 |
| Last Updated: | 2016-08-16 21:51 |
Dependencies (8)
- curl (curl-git, curl-http2-git)
- libpng
- sdl_image
- sdl_mixer
- sdl_ttf
- xdg-utils (busking-git, linopen, mimi-git, sx-open, xdg-utils-git, xdg-utils-mimeo, xdg-utils-patched, xdg-utils-slock)
- xerces-c
- imagemagick (graphicsmagick-imagemagick-compat, imagemagick-fftw, imagemagick-full, imagemagick-full-git, imagemagick-git, imagemagick-no-hdri, imagemagick7) (make)
Required by (0)
Sources (2)
Latest Comments
ngaba commented on 2016-08-16 21:52
mpz commented on 2016-08-14 20:50
Makefile:2044: recipe for target 'Proxy.o' failed
make[2]: *** [Proxy.o] Error 1
make[2]: Leaving directory '/tmp/enigma_sdl/src/enigma-1.21/src'
Makefile:755: recipe for target 'all' failed
make[1]: *** [all] Error 2
make[1]: Leaving directory '/tmp/enigma_sdl/src/enigma-1.21/src'
Makefile:368: recipe for target 'all-recursive' failed
make: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
==> ERROR: A failure occurred in build().
Aborting...
Does not compile for me. I'd like to try this game.
SanskritFritz commented on 2014-03-04 14:50
I think it is more logical to have conflicts only in package variants but not the base package. A base package cannot be aware of all possible variants and should not follow them either. Don't delete your comments, they are useful.
carstene1ns commented on 2014-03-04 14:44
Okay, looks like reverse conflicts are indeed handled by pacman. I remember that pacman bailed out with file conflicts, when I had a similiar case some time ago... but there must have been no conflicts=() at all then.
Looks like I can drop the conflicts from my non-vcs packages then... :)
Anyways, even if it is not required/necessary, it does not hurt to have it, because pacman will simply ignore it.
---
Sorry for the noise, if you agree, I would like to remove my comments then, so it does not cause any confusion later.
SanskritFritz commented on 2014-03-04 12:37
Pacman will remove the other package in either case, just try it.
carstene1ns commented on 2014-03-04 11:25
@SanskritFritz: I am already doing this. ;-)
I just thought that it would not hurt to do so. Only the svn package can provide the non-svn, but both conflict nontheless.
Pacman will also offer to remove either package, if the other gets installed then. This is convenient for users that switch to a dev package to try out new features and have to switch back to a stable package because of bugs or the like.
SanskritFritz commented on 2014-03-04 11:05
carstene1ns: nope that is your job, you have to provide enigma_sdl and conflict with it, there is no need for circular conflicts.
carstene1ns commented on 2014-03-04 10:56
FYI: I have adopted and updated the svn package of enigma[1].
Would be nice, if you could add a conflicts=("$pkgname-svn") to your PKGBUILD the next time you update this package, Thanks!
[1]: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/enigma_sdl-svn/
ngaba commented on 2013-04-06 21:50
@SanskritFritz: Fixed. I removed the enet files (*.a, *.h) from the package, so Enigma uses the build-in enet, but it doesn't fileconflict with system Enet.
SanskritFritz commented on 2013-04-06 20:16
Thanks! Finally enigma works again :)
But it conflicts now with enet, so I had to uninstall speed-dreams and other games in order to play enigma :(
Shouldnt enigma-sdl also provide enet as well?
Also, since pacman 4.1 there must be a package() function in the PKGBUILD.