Arch Linux User Repository

@dreieck, some electron applications have compiled native extensions which link to the electron runtime, and must be built using the correct electron version.

Since the upstream depends on electron 29, to prevent any potential issues, this package is built against electron29.

Installing this, this is the only package that depends on electron29.

What speaks against depending on the generic package electron (which usually is the most up to date version of electron)?

Regards!

I'm not an expert at packaging electron apps, but here's a PKGBUILD for v1.32.1 against electron29.

new PKGBUILD
new min.js
min.sh

dear WSDMatty , kindly ask You to update min browser as release 1.31.2 is the latest dated Feb,23,2024.

Thank You in advance.

/usr/lib/electron29/electron[17799]: ../../third_party/electron_node/src/node_builtins.cc:328:MaybeLocal<Function> node::builtins::BuiltinLoader::LookupAndCompileInternal(Local<Context>, const char *, std::vector<Local<String>> *, Realm *): Assertion `(this) == (optional_realm->env()->builtin_loader())' failed.
 1: 0x5d10c068ad46  [/usr/lib/electron29/electron /usr/lib/min-browser/app]
 2: 0x5d10c068a9cd  [/usr/lib/electron29/electron /usr/lib/min-browser/app]
 3: 0x5d10c0667e98  [/usr/lib/electron29/electron /usr/lib/min-browser/app]
 4: 0x5d10af32a471  [/usr/lib/electron29/electron /usr/lib/min-browser/app]
 5: 0x5d10af326f75  [/usr/lib/electron29/electron /usr/lib/min-browser/app]
 6: 0x5d10c07621a2  [/usr/lib/electron29/electron /usr/lib/min-browser/app]
 7: 0x5d10b45e1fc7  [/usr/lib/electron29/electron /usr/lib/min-browser/app]
Received signal 6
#0 0x5d10b8cafa13 (/usr/lib/electron29/electron+0xe66da12)
#1 0x5d10b8c8b354 (/usr/lib/electron29/electron+0xe649353)
#2 0x5d10b8caf32b (/usr/lib/electron29/electron+0xe66d32a)
#3 0x75566681b770 (/usr/lib/libc.so.6+0x3c76f)
#4 0x75566686c32c (/usr/lib/libc.so.6+0x8d32b)
#5 0x75566681b6c8 gsignal
#6 0x7556668034b8 abort
#7 0x5d10c068ad55 (/usr/lib/electron29/electron+0x16048d54)
#8 0x5d10c068a9cd (/usr/lib/electron29/electron+0x160489cc)
#9 0x5d10c0667e98 (/usr/lib/electron29/electron+0x16025e97)
#10 0x5d10af32a471 (/usr/lib/electron29/electron+0x4ce8470)
#11 0x5d10af326f75 (/usr/lib/electron29/electron+0x4ce4f74)
#12 0x5d10c07621a2 (/usr/lib/electron29/electron+0x161201a1)
#13 0x5d10b45e1fc7 (/usr/lib/electron29/electron+0x9f9ffc6)
  r8: 0000000000000000  r9: 0000000000000001 r10: 0000000000000008 r11: 0000000000000246
 r12: 0000112000094000 r13: 0000000000000006 r14: 00007556669b86a0 r15: 00001120003de918
  di: 0000000000004587  si: 0000000000004587  bp: 00007556630e8940  bx: 0000000000004587
  dx: 0000000000000006  ax: 0000000000000000  cx: 000075566686c32c  sp: 00007ffdc389d3a0
  ip: 000075566686c32c efl: 0000000000000246 cgf: 002b000000000033 erf: 0000000000000000
 trp: 0000000000000000 msk: 0000000000000000 cr2: 0000000000000000
[end of stack trace]
[1]    17799 IOT instruction (core dumped)  min-browser

I agree with walkingstickfan, renaming the package to min-browser would be nice.

I also can't help but notice the electron version being incorrect, as min's package.js indicates electron24 ("electronVersion": "24.5.0")

Finally, and this is just personal preference, I think changing the upstream URL to the GitHub repo would make more sense. Just a thought :)

It would be nice if the package could be renamed to min-browser. Performing commands like yay -Ss min returns too much flotsam.

Attempted to perform a system update a few minutes ago and received the following error:

error: failed to prepare transaction (could not satisfy dependencies)
:: installing electron (1:25-1) breaks dependency 'electron22' required by min

Update: Issue resolved by removing min installed from the Arch repos, performing a system update, and then installing the AUR version.