Package Details: joplin-desktop 3.0.14-1

Git Clone URL: https://aur.archlinux.org/joplin.git (read-only, click to copy)
Package Base: joplin
Description: A note taking and to-do application with synchronization capabilities - Desktop
Upstream URL: https://joplinapp.org/
Keywords: markdown note notetaking productivity
Licenses: MIT
Groups: joplin
Conflicts: joplin-desktop-electron
Submitter: masterkorp
Maintainer: masterkorp
Last Packager: masterkorp
Votes: 263
Popularity: 1.77
First Submitted: 2018-04-18 16:33 (UTC)
Last Updated: 2024-07-29 19:54 (UTC)

Pinned Comments

masterkorp commented on 2021-12-27 11:30 (UTC) (edited on 2021-12-27 11:32 (UTC) by masterkorp)

Hello everyone,

There was been several difficulties upgrading the Joplin due to major changes in the build system upstream.

I have finnally got version 2.6.10 working with pacthes, but remenber:

  • You may need to remove your src/ folder before using this version

  • The patches are still not perfect, you must say yes to a prompt

I will continue working on this later today, but its usable and stable, please remenber you can always report issues on the github repository.

Regards, Alfredo Palhares

masterkorp commented on 2020-12-24 19:58 (UTC) (edited on 2020-12-24 20:00 (UTC) by masterkorp)

Hello everyone,

I will be renaming the packages to its final form.

  • joplin will contain the CLI application
  • joplin-desktop will contain the Desktop version

Also, please for problems with the package, please open an issue on the Github repo, its really hard to provide support on the comments section, you can also email me.

If you have problems with the check() function, just run makepkg with the --nocheck flag.

Thank you for your patience. Regards, Alfredo Palhares

Latest Comments

« First ‹ Previous 1 .. 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 .. 54 Next › Last »

thurisaz commented on 2022-01-19 23:41 (UTC)

It was building with electron16. I tried with the other two versions I've got (13 and 11) but still had the same problem. Maybe it's not the electron version, or maybe these just aren't the right ones. shrug

Anyway, I realized there's an open issue about this on @masterkorp's github and there's even a comment there with a PKGBUILD that's supposed to work. I'll have a look at that when I next have time for this and will probably try building with it.

thurisaz commented on 2022-01-19 22:34 (UTC)

I noticed a comment in the PKGBUILD about electron breaking the interface (# FIXME: Using packaged electron breaks the interface on line 168). According to @masterkorp's pinned comment, the package is "usable and stable", so I wonder if the editor issues we're having might be because of different electron versions?

I've got electron16, electron13, and electron11 installed. I didn't check which one was used when the package was built, but I might rebuild and check. @maderios, @gwenlune, @Darkmind2007, what electon versions have you got installed?

maderios commented on 2022-01-19 19:54 (UTC)

Build needs nodejs 16, 'nodejs-lts-gallium'. Then, same issue with editor than other users. I don't think it's upstream bug because appimage version works fine.

ouuan commented on 2022-01-18 02:55 (UTC)

Please remove --user root in PKGBUILD. Since npm 7, the --user option is no longer available. --user root not only doesn't fix the permission problem, but also installs the package called "root", which conflicts with other packages that also have the --user root option.

thurisaz commented on 2022-01-16 17:06 (UTC)

Yes, I'm having the same problems as @Darkmind2007, @gwenlune, and others -- at least the inability to edit and garbage in the editor. (I haven't used joplin much in the past day, so I don't know if lines from the editor are being rendered in the wrong area.)

I've assumed it was an upstream issue but haven't had a chance to look into it. I've also got joplin 2.6.10 installed on an Ubuntu 21.04 machine. I'm very busy today, but when I have some time I'll check if the same problems show up there -- that might help narrow down the problem.

gwenlune commented on 2022-01-15 20:42 (UTC)

same issue here, no solution found!

Darkmind2007 commented on 2022-01-15 16:31 (UTC) (edited on 2022-01-15 16:31 (UTC) by Darkmind2007)

@thurisaz, thanks for the update! I managed to build and install the package. However, I seem to experience the same issues with the editor that other people were mentioning here:

  • I cannot edit anything

  • The lines from editor sometimes are rendered even outside of the editor area

  • There's often garbage in the editor like "xxxxx"

Have you experienced the same issues? If so, did you manage to fix them?

thurisaz commented on 2022-01-15 12:05 (UTC) (edited on 2022-01-15 12:07 (UTC) by thurisaz)

Like several others posting here, I had trouble upgrading to 2.6.10. Since I've got it installed now, I wanted to share what worked for me in case that helps.

  • The build initially failed with an error about lerna not building. I didn't save the exact error message, but it was similar to what @Darkmind2007 reported in this comment or what @zangoku reported in another comment. It turned out this was because I hadn't updated in a while. Updating my installation fixed the lerna-related error.

  • However, the build still failed with an error about the version of node -- the same one @maderios has here. I had nodejs-lts-erbium installed, which provides version 12.22.8-1, as reported in the error message. Upgrading to a more recent version of nodejs is the solution, as the error message states. I upgraded to nodejs-lts-gallium (v. 16.13.1-1) and then the build worked fine, but according to the error message nodejs-lts-fermium (v. 14.18.2-1) should also provide a recent enough version.

In a nutshell, the build worked fine for me with:

  1. pacman -Syu
  2. pacman -S nodejs-lts-gallium
  3. makepkg -Cs and respond yes to the prompt.

I hope that's helpful to someone. Thanks for the package, @masterkorp! I'm happier using this than an AppImage, and I appreciate the effort you've put in to maintain it.

lordasgart commented on 2022-01-14 05:33 (UTC)

For 2.6.10 you actually have to confirm the yarn.lock warning with the string "yes". "Y" or "y" is not sufficient here.