Package Details: lib32-neon 0.35.0-1

Git Clone URL: https://aur.archlinux.org/lib32-neon.git (read-only, click to copy)
Package Base: lib32-neon
Description: HTTP/1.1 and WebDAV client library (32 bit)
Upstream URL: https://notroj.github.io/neon/
Keywords: lib32
Licenses: LGPL-2.0-or-later
Submitter: rafaelff
Maintainer: rodrigo21
Last Packager: rodrigo21
Votes: 9
Popularity: 0.000408
First Submitted: 2012-01-26 02:14 (UTC)
Last Updated: 2025-08-02 20:17 (UTC)

Latest Comments

publiclewdness commented on 2020-04-30 07:24 (UTC)

Works now, thanks for the quick work.

publiclewdness commented on 2020-04-29 16:49 (UTC)

When trying to build this package I get the error:

"curl: (22) The requested URL returned error: 410 Gone ==> ERROR: Failure while downloading https://fossies.org/linux/www/neon-0.30.2.tar.gz Aborting... Failed to build lib32-neon"

GordonGR commented on 2017-12-29 17:35 (UTC)

I only now noticed these comments. I apologise profoundly. Package updated.

Win8Error commented on 2017-12-29 17:06 (UTC)

webdav.org is still unreachable ...

Please can anyone change the source link to e.g 'https://fossies.org/linux/www/neon-0.30.2.tar.gz'?

yannleretaille commented on 2017-11-17 00:26 (UTC)

http://www.webdav.org/ seems to be down at the moment The source is also available here: https://fossies.org/linux/www/neon-0.30.2.tar.gz

JonnyJD commented on 2015-06-30 17:15 (UTC)

Please use validpkgkeys() as suggested in http://allanmcrae.com/2015/01/two-pgp-keyrings-for-package-management-in-arch-linux/ : For this package this would be validpgpkeys=("6D0C74985535060B23300BFE47F6969D0E44CF0C") # Joe Orton The user still needs the command gpg --keyserver keys.gnupg.net --recv-keys 47F6969D0E44CF0C or in ~/.gnupg/gpg.conf: keyserver hkp://keys.gnupg.net keyserver-options auto-key-retrieve The user then doesn *not* need to specify a trust value for the key (like he needs to now).

quequotion commented on 2015-01-11 18:13 (UTC)

This will not build because of an unknown public key. Security is great and all, but is this signature necessary?