Package Details: gnome-terminal-fedora 3.30.2-1

Git Clone URL: https://aur.archlinux.org/gnome-terminal-fedora.git (read-only)
Package Base: gnome-terminal-fedora
Description: The GNOME Terminal Emulator with Fedora patches
Upstream URL: https://wiki.gnome.org/Apps/Terminal
Keywords: dark gnome notifications notify patched terminal transparency transparent
Licenses: GPL
Groups: gnome
Conflicts: gnome-terminal
Provides: gnome-terminal=3.30.2
Submitter: BerelTarMaciltur
Maintainer: ljmf00
Last Packager: dsboger
Votes: 58
Popularity: 0.344380
First Submitted: 2015-03-29 22:28
Last Updated: 2018-10-28 17:26

Required by (10)

Sources (4)

Pinned Comments

SunRed commented on 2016-04-13 18:16

For those that are just looking for a transparency mode in gnome-terminal and don't need the notification feature I would like to refer those to gnome-terminal-transparency by hoschi.
(Edit) Link: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/gnome-terminal-transparency

Latest Comments

1 2 3 4 5 6 ... Next › Last »

dsboger commented on 2019-03-12 00:17

Hi community. I'm sorry to say that I'm not having enough time to maintain this and other AUR packages anymore. I'm disowning this in hopes that someone else will give it the love it deserves. Cya!

dsboger commented on 2018-02-20 14:51

@purejava should be fixed now. Thanks for reporting!

purejava commented on 2018-02-20 13:28

Package fails with 403 on downloading _fpatchfile1: curl: (22) The requested URL returned error: 403 Forbidden

==> FEHLER: Fehler beim Download von http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/rpms/gnome-terminal/raw/4b7a8b18c926c9599580e5b059d9f9738dd7ed0c/f/0001-build-Don-t-treat-warnings-as-errors.patch

dsboger commented on 2017-09-19 14:13

@hpstg I've tested just now and both vte3-notification and gnome-terminal-fedora built without issues. Can you describe in more detail what problem you faced? What step failed? What error messages were displayed? Thanks for reporting!

hpstg commented on 2017-09-19 13:06

Unfortunatelly the package won't build because vte3 won't pass a check.

hoschi commented on 2017-04-27 09:37

@dsboger:
That's fine, I also don't see a big issue. Probably the developers or officall maintainers of Archlinux change their mind and explicitly use base or base-devel as 'dependes' or 'makedepends'.

dsboger commented on 2017-04-27 02:34

@hoschi @SunRed I've read some debate on that topic. True, we may assume base-devel is installed, but then why not make it explicit in, say, pacman? Relying on common assumption and a wiki page seems a brittle foundation to me, specially considering we have a dependency resolution mechanism in place, and SunRed tasted one of its shortcomings. My opinion is not strong, since it is a small matter, but I have yet to see a good reason for omitting deps, beyond "we assume..." or "it is in the wiki". So... I'll leave it as it is, because inertia.

SunRed commented on 2017-04-27 00:54

Curiously enough I did not have pkg-config installed anymore although I do have the base-devel group installed of course. Must've been removed with another package I uninstalled. I did not think about it being a devel package when posting this here. Sorry, my fault then :)

hoschi commented on 2017-04-26 15:22

Hello dsboger!

I can't gurantee that, but I think you don't need to include 'pkg-config'. Probably I should have shared my findings earlier also here[1]. Basically wiki says "no packages from base-devel" and likely also not "base-devel" as group :)

[1] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/gnome-terminal-transparency -> see my answer :)

SunRed commented on 2017-04-26 10:22

Package fails build process without pkg-config package. Would be nice if you add it to makedepends.