Package Details: libretro-nestopia-git r828.071f04e-1

Git Clone URL: https://aur.archlinux.org/libretro-nestopia-git.git (read-only)
Package Base: libretro-nestopia-git
Description: Nintendo Entertainment System core
Upstream URL: https://github.com/libretro/nestopia
Licenses: GPL2
Groups: libretro-unstable
Conflicts: libretro-nestopia
Provides: libretro-nestopia
Submitter: alucryd
Maintainer: alucryd
Last Packager: alucryd
Votes: 2
Popularity: 0.000003
First Submitted: 2015-08-27 10:16
Last Updated: 2017-09-24 11:26

Required by (3)

Sources (2)

Latest Comments

alucryd commented on 2017-09-24 11:28

Like I said, I prefer it like that so I get notified when there's a new version. My sources are persistent so files don't get downloaded twice, in this case this prevents me from knowing if the file has been updated upstream.

I haven't had the time to create a separate git package for info files yet, but I will soon.

finkler commented on 2017-09-10 18:50

The checksum for the info file is outdated again.
I mean it is a file in a git repo, isn't the nature oft such things to change offen, compared to a real release?
SKIP makes the most sense to me.

alucryd commented on 2017-08-08 21:02

Apologies for the delay, I completely forgot about this. I don't want to use SKIP because then I won't know when an info file has been updated. That said, I'll probably make a package containing all info files since they now have a repository dedicated to them. Stay tuned.

finkler commented on 2017-01-22 08:18

Hello,

the sha256 sum for the info file is incorrect now, again. Since the info file might be as subjectable to change as the git version of the core itself, I would recommend using SKIP for the sha356 as well. (The same goes for all other libretro core packages)

Regards!

slinkygn commented on 2015-10-27 03:33

Workaround: Delete the SHA256 hash from PKGBUILD, replace with 'SKIP' (so in the parens you'll have two 'SKIP's).

slinkygn commented on 2015-10-25 02:34

Yup, same here.

benoliver999 commented on 2015-10-22 18:46

I'm getting an integrity check failure for this one. Anyone else?