Package Details: librewolf-bin 1:150.0.3_1-1

Git Clone URL: https://aur.archlinux.org/librewolf-bin.git (read-only, click to copy)
Package Base: librewolf-bin
Description: Community-maintained fork of Firefox, focused on privacy, security and freedom.
Upstream URL: https://librewolf.net/
Keywords: browser web
Licenses: MPL-2.0
Conflicts: librewolf
Provides: librewolf
Submitter: lsf
Maintainer: lsf
Last Packager: lsf
Votes: 626
Popularity: 24.26
First Submitted: 2019-06-16 13:12 (UTC)
Last Updated: 2026-05-13 07:44 (UTC)

Required by (39)

Sources (7)

Pinned Comments

lsf commented on 2021-11-10 12:14 (UTC) (edited on 2026-05-07 09:38 (UTC) by lsf)

https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Arch_User_Repository#Acquire_a_PGP_public_key_if_needed

gpg --keyserver hkp://keyserver.ubuntu.com --search-keys 031F7104E932F7BD7416E7F6D2845E1305D6E801

/edit: starting with 112.0-1, the binaries are signed with the maintainers shared key, so gpg --keyserver hkp://keyserver.ubuntu.com --search-keys 662E3CDD6FE329002D0CA5BB40339DD82B12EF16 should do the trick instead. I've also signed the key with the previously used key, so you have at least some guarantee that it's not a malicious attack :)

/edit: (2026-05-07): The upstream signing sub-key was rotated, and the .tar.xz tarballs will now be signed with a new subkey. The main key id (0x662E3CDD6FE329002D0CA5BB40339DD82B12EF16) remains unchanged though, so should you get an error during signature verification about a missing (sub)key, all that's required would be to refresh the key(s) via gpg --refresh-keys 662E3CDD6FE329002D0CA5BB40339DD82B12EF16.

Latest Comments

« First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 .. 29 Next › Last »

lsf commented on 2025-10-06 22:40 (UTC)

Maybe, my dearest @lone-cloud, the issue might be somewhat related to the fact that we're currently more or less one-and-a-half people at best maintaining pretty much the whole thing.

That's very much not optimal, true.

More importantly though: your approach to handling a packaging issue you've spotted is pretty much not helping, and would be disheartening, if it weren't for me being stubborn, I guess. (Also, I wouldn't want to leave the only other remaining core maintainer completely alone with the project, so "stepping down" is not an option.)

Way more words than I should've spent on this, so: on with more productive things.

Thanks for bringing this issue to my attention. Huge thanks to @DKMellow on Codeberg for the PR. I'll take care of merging it and updating the PKGBUILDs tomorrow, as soon as I've gotten a few hours of sleep.

spsf64 commented on 2025-10-06 21:53 (UTC) (edited on 2025-10-06 21:54 (UTC) by spsf64)

@lone-cloud instead of complaining and cursing at the maintainer, you could have, politely, asked him/her to become a co-maintainer or suggest a patch/fix...

dpirate commented on 2025-10-03 15:32 (UTC)

In the .desktop file shipped in this package, there's "StartupWMClass=LibreWolf". This is wrong. It should be "StartupWMClass=librewolf". Or else Plank won't recognise LibreWolf's desktop file and you can't keep in dock.

Markil3 commented on 2025-07-18 20:15 (UTC)

For those coming from https://lists.archlinux.org/archives/list/aur-general@lists.archlinux.org/thread/7EZTJXLIAQLARQNTMEW2HBWZYE626IFJ/, note that the malware is from librewolf-FIX-bin. This package has not been compromised.

Stonemincan commented on 2025-06-13 13:05 (UTC)

When trying to build I get the following error: Failed to generate librewolf-bin information

cmt101 commented on 2025-06-06 20:21 (UTC) (edited on 2025-06-06 20:53 (UTC) by cmt101)

In Arch:
==> Verifying source file signatures with gpg... librewolf-139.0.1-1-linux-x86_64-package.tar.xz ... FAILED (unknown public key 8A74EAAF89C17944) ==> ERROR: One or more PGP signatures could not be verified
Solved with:
$ gpg --recv-keys 8A74EAAF89C17944

<deleted-account> commented on 2025-05-29 00:44 (UTC)

fails to build

==> Validating source files with sha256sums...
    source ... Passed
    default192x192.png ... Passed
    librewolf.desktop ... Passed
==> Validating source_x86_64 files with sha256sums...
    librewolf-139.0-1-linux-x86_64-package.tar.xz ... Passed
    librewolf-139.0-1-linux-x86_64-package.tar.xz.sig ... Skipped
==> Verifying source file signatures with gpg...
    librewolf-139.0-1-linux-x86_64-package.tar.xz ... FAILED (unknown public key 8A74EAAF89C17944)
==> ERROR: One or more PGP signatures could not be verified!
error: failed to download sources for 'librewolf-bin-1:139.0.0_1-1': 
error: packages failed to build: librewolf-bin-1:139.0.0_1-1

marbens commented on 2025-05-17 20:49 (UTC)

FYI I don't think this package conforms to the Arch package guidelines about not relying on transitive dependencies and using an SPDX license identifier.

Also see https://codeberg.org/librewolf/arch/pulls/20.

LokiNaBoki commented on 2025-05-03 08:26 (UTC)

When the package is updated the information about usr/lib/librewolf/librewolf.cfg.pacnew is always printed, even though it usually is not created. Could this message be put behind a if [[ -f '/usr/lib/librewolf/librewolf.cfg.pacnew' ]]?