Search Criteria
Package Details: ido-ubuntu 13.10.0.17.04.20161028-3
Package Actions
- View PKGBUILD / View Changes
- Download snapshot
- Search wiki
- Flag package out-of-date
- 1 pending request
- Submit Request
Git Clone URL: | https://aur.archlinux.org/ido-ubuntu.git (read-only, click to copy) |
---|---|
Package Base: | ido-ubuntu |
Description: | Widgets and other objects used for indicators |
Upstream URL: | https://launchpad.net/ido |
Licenses: | LGPL |
Groups: | unity |
Conflicts: | ido |
Provides: | ido |
Submitter: | horsemanoffaith |
Maintainer: | quequotion |
Last Packager: | quequotion |
Votes: | 2 |
Popularity: | 0.000000 |
First Submitted: | 2016-02-06 23:18 (UTC) |
Last Updated: | 2022-02-17 12:45 (UTC) |
Dependencies (5)
- gtk3-ubuntuAUR
- gobject-introspection (gobject-introspection-gitAUR) (make)
- gtk-doc (make)
- vala (vala-gitAUR) (make)
- xorg-util-macros (make)
Latest Comments
1 2 Next › Last »
quequotion commented on 2023-02-14 09:48 (UTC) (edited on 2023-02-14 10:02 (UTC) by quequotion)
Today I received a notification of a deletion request for this package.
That request is invalid and out of order.
I am aware that I need to contest it on the mailing list, but until I find a mail client capable of doing so correctly, I must respond here.
The request claims that this package does not apply Ubuntu patches and instead applies an unrelated, custom patch.
Setting aside if that is correct or not, this is not a reason to delete or rename the package: it would be a correctable error at worst, which I would happily correct. The user filing this request has made no attempt to contact me regarding the package, neither in these comments or by direct email. The request for deletion is invalid for the former reason and out of order for the second.
In response to the claim itself, this is not my original package, but I have maintained it for some time. This version of ido is sourced from an Ubuntu repository, which I understand to already have the Ubuntu patches applied. There is a separate, unrelated patch included; I have never investigated the purpose of that patch and cannot say if it is or ever was necessary. My best guess is that this patch corrects something to maintain feature parity with "vanilla" ido.
That said, I maintain this package for one purpose only: building and installing wingpanel-indicator-ayatana. It is intended that vendors will give up Ayatana (Unity 7+) indicators in favor of a new, unified standard for SNI (which I do not believe will ever happen) or publish separate indicators for all competing desktop environments with an SNI implementation (which I believe to be equally impossible), as such the indicator itself is deprecated although a community-maintained fork is available. There are also alternate versions of ido, including an updated Ayatana project that seems to be carrying on despite being abandoned by Canonical. I do not know if that project maintains the particular feature that Ubuntu patched in to distinguish their indicators from GNOME's. It is theoretically possible that this particular version of ido(-ubuntu) is obsolete, but a good deal of investigation needs to be done to establish that.
quequotion commented on 2022-02-19 05:32 (UTC)
@txtsd
I adopted the package a few days ago. It builds in a clean chroot now!
txtsd commented on 2021-07-10 06:59 (UTC)
Are you ever going to fix this?
quequotion commented on 2019-10-08 11:04 (UTC) (edited on 2019-11-04 13:12 (UTC) by quequotion)
In commit
b3c50b26f33e
(2016-11-16), you changed the build directory but not the path to the patch file; this package has most likely to failed to build ever since.In commit
6443c12b2fa1
(2018-05-04), you changed the dependency fromgtk3-ubuntu
togtk3
. This package requiresgtk3-ubuntu
; if built in a clean chroot it will fail trying to build againstgtk3
.Fixes for both:
Adcock commented on 2019-08-13 15:04 (UTC)
Fails to build. See this : https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/xgPktrG3rW/
A.J commented on 2019-03-05 06:20 (UTC)
it fails to build
Quyet commented on 2019-01-20 09:33 (UTC)
I got patch failed: file not found. If I edit patch command like: replace ../ with ./, then patch runs successfully.
SolarAquarion commented on 2018-04-30 14:52 (UTC)
you should add "provides ido"
horsemanoffaith commented on 2016-12-11 05:36 (UTC)
artaeun commented on 2016-12-10 12:20 (UTC)
1 2 Next › Last »