Package Details: openrgb-udev-rules 0.9-2

Git Clone URL: https://aur.archlinux.org/openrgb-udev-rules.git (read-only, click to copy)
Package Base: openrgb-udev-rules
Description: UDEV rules for OpenRGB Flatpak and Appimage.
Upstream URL: https://openrgb.org
Keywords: devices openrgb rgb udev
Licenses: GPL2
Conflicts: openrgb
Submitter: joseafga
Maintainer: joseafga
Last Packager: joseafga
Votes: 2
Popularity: 0.122802
First Submitted: 2023-01-26 06:41 (UTC)
Last Updated: 2023-08-08 20:26 (UTC)

Dependencies (0)

Required by (0)

Sources (1)

Latest Comments

trouter commented on 2023-08-08 21:46 (UTC)

@joseafga it works now, thanks!

joseafga commented on 2023-08-08 20:33 (UTC)

@trouter, the error occurred because the downloaded file from the previous version already existed and had the same name, so it wasn't downloaded again. I have changed it so that the files have unique names per version, if you can test again.

trouter commented on 2023-08-08 19:10 (UTC) (edited on 2023-08-08 19:10 (UTC) by trouter)

Version 0.9 does not install for me; looks like the SHA256 is incorrect

==> Making package: openrgb-udev-rules 0.9-1 (Tue 08 Aug 2023 20:03:24 BST)
==> WARNING: Skipping dependency checks.
==> Retrieving sources...
  -> Found 60-openrgb.rules
==> WARNING: Skipping verification of source file PGP signatures.
==> Validating source files with sha256sums...
    60-openrgb.rules ... FAILED
==> ERROR: One or more files did not pass the validity check!

==> Starting package()...
==> Tidying install...
  -> Removing libtool files...
  -> Purging unwanted files...
  -> Removing static library files...
  -> Stripping unneeded symbols from binaries and libraries...
  -> Compressing man and info pages...
==> Checking for packaging issues...
==> Creating package "openrgb-udev-rules"...
  -> Generating .PKGINFO file...
  -> Generating .BUILDINFO file...
  -> Adding install file...
  -> Generating .MTREE file...
  -> Compressing package...
==> Leaving fakeroot environment.
==> Finished making: openrgb-udev-rules 0.8-1 (Sun 29 Jan 2023 17:15:53 GMT)
==> Cleaning up...

However upon downloading the file manually and comparing the SHA, it looks correct, so I do not know what is going on. Does this happen for anybody else?