Package Details: igv 2.17.2-1

Git Clone URL: https://aur.archlinux.org/igv.git (read-only, click to copy)
Package Base: igv
Description: High-performance visualization tool for interactive exploration of large, integrated genomic datasets. From Broad Institute.
Upstream URL: http://www.broadinstitute.org/software/igv/home
Licenses: MIT
Submitter: decryptedepsilon
Maintainer: balwierz (Rhinoceros)
Last Packager: Rhinoceros
Votes: 14
Popularity: 0.000140
First Submitted: 2014-03-23 21:07 (UTC)
Last Updated: 2024-02-11 23:11 (UTC)

Pinned Comments

Rhinoceros commented on 2024-01-08 09:29 (UTC)

As of igv 2.17.0, upstream is now compiling with Java 17, so you can uninstall Java 11 now if you have no other use for it, e.g. sudo pacman -Rns jre11-openjdk jre11-openjdk-headless.

Latest Comments

1 2 3 4 Next › Last »

Rhinoceros commented on 2024-01-08 09:29 (UTC)

As of igv 2.17.0, upstream is now compiling with Java 17, so you can uninstall Java 11 now if you have no other use for it, e.g. sudo pacman -Rns jre11-openjdk jre11-openjdk-headless.

Rhinoceros commented on 2023-06-13 12:48 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up @ohell. It should work now.

ohell commented on 2023-06-13 12:32 (UTC) (edited on 2023-06-13 12:33 (UTC) by ohell)

Hello, the latest update igv-2.16.1-1 from AUR is not installing:

==> Validating source files with sha512sums...

IGV_Linux_2.16.1_WithJava.zip ... Passed

igv.sh ... Passed

igv_hidpi.sh ... Passed

igv.desktop ... Passed

igv_hidpi.desktop ... Passed

igv-license-2022.txt ... FAILED

IGV_64.png ... Passed

==> ERROR: One or more files did not pass the validity check!

Rhinoceros commented on 2022-10-26 01:06 (UTC)

Thanks @wangzhichao. Yep, they updated it a few hours ago and removed the old version. 🙄

I just updated the package again.

wangzhichao commented on 2022-10-26 00:56 (UTC) (edited on 2022-10-26 00:57 (UTC) by wangzhichao)

The requested URL /igv/projects/downloads/2.15/IGV_Linux_2.15.0_WithJava.zip was not found on this server.

the lastest version is 2.15.1

Rhinoceros commented on 2022-04-23 06:42 (UTC)

@SamLukeYes Thanks for that. Hmm, yes, I don't entirely understand the logic with Java packages. Especially when there are sources available, it seems logical to me to call this package -bin to differentiate, regardless of Java or not.

SamLukeYes commented on 2022-04-23 02:47 (UTC)

@Rhinoceros I see the guidelines here. It says

Packages that use prebuilt deliverables, when the sources are available, must use the -bin suffix.

However, I didn't notice the next sentence, which says

An exception to this is with Java.

Then using the official binary releases would be OK for a Java package without the -bin suffix, perhaps :p

Rhinoceros commented on 2022-04-23 00:32 (UTC)

@SamLukeYes Good point. I did have a vague memory that -bin suffixes are only required if there is an alternative package that builds from source. i.e. if the "from-source" package does not exist yet, then there is no need to name this package igv-bin, and it's fine to call it igv. However, I can't seem to find this now, and perhaps my memory fails me. In fact, I can't find any guidelines in the Arch wiki or anywhere official.

SamLukeYes commented on 2022-04-22 11:37 (UTC)

Upstream source code is available for this package. I suppose this package should have a -bin suffix, or be built from source.

balwierz commented on 2019-04-24 11:18 (UTC)

Thanks for your contribution!