Arch Linux User Repository

No problem! But you might want to re-read that wiki article yourself - it doesn't recommend pinning submodule revisions.

Thanks for the kind words. I appreciate your offer of co-maintainership. If it becomes too much, I'll reach out to you. I appreciate the overall support in this community. It's the sole reason why I started contributing.

About the submodules: I'm perfectly fine with a different solution. I really don't have that much of a strong opinion on this topic, as it practically makes no difference after the preparation phase. If you're interested in why I think it's best practice, feel free to read the Tips and tricks section of the VCS package guidelines.

No need to apologise! Although I have a different view of the best practice here, I still appreciate the work you've put into this.

I'm sorry that you're feeling that way. I would be happy to act as a co-maintainer of this package if you would prefer I fix small problems like this myself instead of bugging you.

The reason for including submodules in a PKGBUILD is to allow the package to be rebuilt whenever the source repositories change, which does not apply in this case. Removing them would reduce duplication of information, eliminate a possible source of error, and reduce the maintenance burden on you. However, if you prefer to include them, then that's fine too - you are volunteering your time after all and the end result is the same.

Either way, thank you for your contributions and for maintaining this package

@dampkwab Thanks for reporting this issue. I've updated the commit hashes.

I understand that removing the submodules would avoid errors on my side, but as I mentioned earlier, I believe the current PKGBUILD file follows packaging best practices, so I’d prefer not to change it.

To be honest (and judging by this comment section), I think I'm a bit burned out from working on open source projects. I've become a little careless, and I'm sorry for the inconvenience this has caused you. I'll do better next time.

@Sematre The submodules' pinned commits & shasums have not been updated to reflect the latest releases.

I would again suggest removing them from the PKGBUILD to avoid this issue - otherwise they will all need to be updated with each new release.

Please also note that the pkgrel should be reset to 1 when the pkgver is updated.

Here's a patch with submodule tags & shasums

https://pastebin.com/4SHVGz3P

That would certainly resolve the issue with repeated rebuilds - cheers @Sematre

@dampkwab Thanks for reaching out.

VCS packages don't have to track the latest commit of a project. This is stated at the very top of the page that you linked. This also applies to submodules. Quote from the Arch Wiki:

Version control systems can be used for retrieval of source code for usual statically versioned packages, and the latest (trunk) version of a development branch.

I am aware that having unpinned sources in the build file will result in makepkg checking every time for updates. I, personally, don't care too much about this, but I can see why this might bother people. That's why I'm going to start pinning the submodules to their specific sha256 hash. This will keep the spirit of always including all the necessary external dependencies in the sources list, but should also fix the issue with makepkg.

@Sematre Thank you for maintaining this package. I have a suggestion to make:

Although this package uses a git source, it fetches a specific release and is therefore not a VCS package. (that would be pico-sdk-git)

That means the submodules shouldn't be included in the sources array as they should only be updated when a new version of pico-sdk is released. Removing them also greatly improves packaging efficiency.

diff --git a/PKGBUILD b/PKGBUILD
index 364f60b..4c8919c 100644
--- a/PKGBUILD
+++ b/PKGBUILD
@@ -18,31 +18,14 @@ conflicts=("raspberry-pico-sdk-git")
options=('!strip')
install=reload-environment-variables.install
source=("git+${url}.git#tag=${pkgver}"
-        "git+https://github.com/bluekitchen/btstack.git"
-        "git+https://github.com/georgerobotics/cyw43-driver.git"
-        "git+https://github.com/lwip-tcpip/lwip.git"
-        "git+https://github.com/Mbed-TLS/mbedtls.git"
-        "git+https://github.com/hathach/tinyusb.git"
        "setup-environment-variables.sh")
sha256sums=('23acedc0e067cca748aab1041e02d74c8ea29b8ab8689d1ae3a20384e82f105d'
-            'SKIP'
-            'SKIP'
-            'SKIP'
-            'SKIP'
-            'SKIP'
            '155dbf10a6a9239849a166595bb3287bc410ef54f7d850e8dc9c50fddc1a7a3e')

prepare() {
        cd "${srcdir}/pico-sdk"
        git submodule init
-
-       git config submodule."lib/btstack".url      "${srcdir}/btstack"
-       git config submodule."lib/cyw43-driver".url "${srcdir}/cyw43-driver"
-       git config submodule."lib/lwip".url         "${srcdir}/lwip"
-       git config submodule."lib/mbedtls".url      "${srcdir}/mbedtls"
-       git config submodule."lib/tinyusb".url      "${srcdir}/tinyusb"
-
-       git -c protocol.file.allow=always submodule update
+       git submodule update
}

package() {

Could you please apply the above patch?

I think we should change the name to Libraries and tools for C/C++ development on Raspberry Pi Pico microcontrollers.