Package Details: google-cloud-cli 476.0.0-1

Git Clone URL: https://aur.archlinux.org/google-cloud-cli.git (read-only, click to copy)
Package Base: google-cloud-cli
Description: A set of command-line tools for the Google Cloud Platform. Includes gcloud (with beta and alpha commands), gsutil, and bq.
Upstream URL: https://cloud.google.com/cli/
Keywords: cloud gcloud gcp google sdk
Licenses: Apache-2.0
Conflicts: google-cloud-sdk
Provides: google-cloud-sdk
Replaces: google-cloud-sdk
Submitter: PolarianDev
Maintainer: jvybihal
Last Packager: jvybihal
Votes: 189
Popularity: 1.67
First Submitted: 2023-03-08 09:33 (UTC)
Last Updated: 2024-05-14 18:39 (UTC)

Dependencies (2)

Required by (15)

Sources (3)

Pinned Comments

Latest Comments

« First ‹ Previous 1 .. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 .. 30 Next › Last »

sudoforge commented on 2020-06-15 03:00 (UTC)

@allsyed component support in individual packages is still under way; only a few packages are currently maintained (check my profile for a complete list). Read the pinned comment(s) for instructions on how to receive support for this package, and how to modify your installation to allow for component management via gcloud components <command>.

allsyed commented on 2020-06-15 02:57 (UTC)

How do I go about installing other components?

Like when I try to install cloud_sql_proxy. I get this message.

ERROR: (gcloud.components.install) You cannot perform this action because this Cloud SDK installation is managed by an external package manager. Please consider using a separate installation of the Cloud SDK created through the default mechanism described at: https://cloud.google.com/sdk/

sudoforge commented on 2020-04-23 19:27 (UTC)

@brody great catch, that was patched in. As a reminder, please use Github to submit patches, ask questions, and raise issues.

brody commented on 2020-04-22 18:37 (UTC)

Please can you adjust the permission of the bash-completion file to 644 (from the least privilege perspective)?

diff --git a/PKGBUILD b/PKGBUILD
index ce029a3..6260b9d 100644
--- a/PKGBUILD
+++ b/PKGBUILD
@@ -66,7 +66,7 @@ package() {
   install -Dm755 "${srcdir}/${source[1]}" \
     "${pkgdir}/etc/profile.d/google-cloud-sdk.sh"

-  install -Dm755 "${pkgdir}/opt/${pkgname}/completion.bash.inc" \
+  install -Dm644 "${pkgdir}/opt/${pkgname}/completion.bash.inc" \
     "${pkgdir}/etc/bash_completion.d/google-cloud-sdk"

   mkdir -p "${pkgdir}/usr/share"

mindrunner commented on 2020-02-18 22:20 (UTC)

Will do, thank you for help and patience! :)

sudoforge commented on 2020-02-18 22:16 (UTC)

Haha, cannot patch PKGUILD because 'patch not found'. reinstalled base-devel group and all good now! :)

I guessed that was going to be the issue, but wanted to make sure we debugged it properly. Glad it's sorted out! As a note, please use the GitHub parent project for reporting issues in the future.

mindrunner commented on 2020-02-18 22:13 (UTC)

Haha, cannot patch PKGUILD because 'patch not found'. reinstalled base-devel group and all good now! :)

Cheers

sudoforge commented on 2020-02-18 21:30 (UTC) (edited on 2020-02-18 21:36 (UTC) by sudoforge)

Super weird. I still encounter this on one computer (a virtual server), however I am able to install the package on my laptop without any problems. Both are set up in pretty much the same way, but differ in the list of installed packages (e.g. laptop has desktop stuff installed). Using yay as the aur-helper on both machines. Tried manually with makepkg, same result. I cannot figure out an easy way to see why patching fails (no verbose option).

After cloning this repository on the failing machine, apply the following patch to the PKGBUILD before running makepkg; this should give us the information we need:

diff -urN a/PKGBUILD b/PKGBUILD
--- a/PKGBUILD  2020-02-18 13:33:09.701671909 -0800
+++ b/PKGBUILD  2020-02-18 13:35:33.254889896 -0800
@@ -36,7 +36,7 @@
   cd "$pkgname"

   for f in ./../*.patch; do
-    patch -p1 -i $f > /dev/null 2>&1 || ( echo "failed to apply patch: $(basename $f)" && exit 1 )
+    patch -p1 --verbose -i $f
   done
 }

I've uploaded the above patch to ix.io. To easily apply this from your virtual server:

$ git clone https://aur.archlinux.org/google-cloud-sdk.git
$ cd google-cloud-sdk
$ patch -p1 < <(wget -qO- http://ix.io/2c5o)
$ makepkg -sr

Edit: I initially made this comment with an invalid patch containing an erroneous s I had added to verify that the patch would print out the error.

mindrunner commented on 2020-02-18 21:07 (UTC)

Super weird. I still encounter this on one computer (a virtual server), however I am able to install the package on my laptop without any problems. Both are set up in pretty much the same way, but differ in the list of installed packages (e.g. laptop has desktop stuff installed). Using yay as the aur-helper on both machines. Tried manually with makepkg, same result. I cannot figure out an easy way to see why patching fails (no verbose option).

sudoforge commented on 2020-02-18 19:54 (UTC) (edited on 2020-02-18 20:01 (UTC) by sudoforge)

==> Extracting sources... -> Extracting google-cloud-sdk_279.0.0.orig.tar.gz with bsdtar ==> Starting prepare()... failed to apply patch: 0001-fix-console-io-syntax-warning.patch ==> ERROR: A failure occurred in prepare().

Since a couple of days now. Any news on this?

I apologize for the delay in responding to you; I'm just now seeing this. This would seem to indicate that there is an error with applying the patch file at commit 3540d93b5a51f9a0cd3a6b54c9491363efcfb4f3 in this repository (d60f3d6bb2808253fd4b51d975b78c47ae6e3080 in the parent).

I'm not able to recreate this at that revision, nor at the latest. For context, commits are only sent to this repository (and the parent) if the google-cloud-sdk package is built successfully in a chroot. I have also taken to testing that various subcommands return expected results without errors or erroneous content spewed out to the console due to recent upstream issues (which I have opened bugs for). These are not automated yet; I build and install the package, and then perform some manual "E2E tests".

That said, I'm surprised to hear that you encountered issues. Are you still experiencing this, @mindrunner? Is anyone else?