Someone create a new package with the working version and mark this as out to date until the dev wants to work about QT packages (who will never be the case)
It's the best to do to get a nice OOB experience
| Git Clone URL: | https://aur.archlinux.org/masterpdfeditor.git (read-only, click to copy) |
|---|---|
| Package Base: | masterpdfeditor |
| Description: | A complete solution for viewing, creating and editing PDF files |
| Upstream URL: | https://code-industry.net/free-pdf-editor/ |
| Keywords: | master-pdf-editor |
| Licenses: | custom |
| Submitter: | farseerfc |
| Maintainer: | pgoetz |
| Last Packager: | pgoetz |
| Votes: | 200 |
| Popularity: | 0.84 |
| First Submitted: | 2016-12-05 01:50 (UTC) |
| Last Updated: | 2026-04-17 01:14 (UTC) |
« First ‹ Previous 1 .. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 .. 35 Next › Last »
Someone create a new package with the working version and mark this as out to date until the dev wants to work about QT packages (who will never be the case)
It's the best to do to get a nice OOB experience
Thank you @j1simon the build went smoothly and MasterPdfEditor works :-)
In any case, this is the PKGBUILD to create the package with libraries included: https://gist.github.com/simonbcn/57865e7790bd2734110c9ec6766f5828
Download it, with name PKGBUILD, to a new folder and execute makepkg -si in that folder.
@nursoda What this company deserves is that we don't use their program.
Instead of fixing what they have to fix and releasing a new version (this error was detected months ago and it was caused by a misuse of the Qt API), they release a version with the Qt libraries and with that they consider that it is fixed.
I will not be the one to renew the program's license after this behavior.
Last night I asked Code Industry support: "Please read the latest comment on the MasterPDFEditor AUR package and the issues bundled libs cause installing it on Arch linux. Please comment your proposed solution there as vendor statement." They already replied: "It is fixed in the new version."
Honestly, some of you are a little annoying, repeating the same thing over and over again.
The package "master-pdf-editor-5.4.38-qt5-all.amd64.tar.gz" is already known to work because it contains all the libraries and that script (masterpdfeditor5.sh) changes the paths of the libraries to point to those of that package. That isn't a patch, that's a different kind of installation.
The developers of marterpdfeditor are responsible for solving this because it is not open source, it is not a free program either and: "QMutexPool::globalInstanceGet was a private Qt5 API, so there was no guarantee of stability. It's been removed upstream with 5.14. Code Industry should have never used it in the first place."
Having two versions of Qt libraries installed at same time is not a good idea, not this way, so I agree with Scimmia's comment: "Switching to all bundled libs like that is NOT a solution".
Download and uncompress "master-pdf-editor-5.4.38-qt5-all.amd64.tar.gz" is a temporary fix but the final solution is taking a long time from the masterpdfeditor developers.
That's why I've asked you several times to complain to the people in charge directly: support@code-industry.net and not here. And that you insist as much as it is necessary.
You are also free to create a new AUR package to install the version with all the libraries (master-pdf-editor-5.4.38-qt5-all.amd64.tar.gz). But if anyone does, be very careful not to screw up the system's Qt libraries.
He doesn't seem to have that much time, in these times it's difficult to be everywhere
Maybe he will at least be available after the COVID events, or maybe before
@bkb: That patch needs to be applied with git in a second shell while the install runs - nothing a typical end user would do.
I marked the package as outdated in order to notify the maintainer. He removed the mark, so he monitors things, but did not change the script.
@asamarin I'm not sure of how this patch should work, I'm used to get and install those packages with yay, so I don't really have the method to apply it
However if it fixes for everyone I guess that it should be fine. The maintainer should push it and I will try it when he will do so, and if a new problem arises I will make a new comment here and we will think about it
If it's not an automatic update, the maintainer last intervention look like been at 2020-04-07 19:28 on chromium-widevine, and his last comment at 2020-03-29 14:14 in grass. So i don't know where he is but he should see our comments, if he's fine
@asamarin The patch wasn't chopped off. If it were, the patch tool would complain because the line counts in the hunk would not match. The end of it is the "if [...] then" statement in the existing file - because you're looking at a diff of a diff. The sha1 sum discrepancy is due to whitespace differences.
Pinned Comments
Alad commented on 2021-03-03 16:25 (UTC)
The next person who discusses keygens will have their account suspended indefinitely.