Package Details: proton-ge-custom-bin 1:GE_Proton10_34-1

Git Clone URL: https://aur.archlinux.org/proton-ge-custom-bin.git (read-only, click to copy)
Package Base: proton-ge-custom-bin
Description: A fancy custom distribution of Valves Proton with various patches
Upstream URL: https://github.com/GloriousEggroll/proton-ge-custom
Keywords: d9vk DXVK Faudio GloriousEggroll MediaFoundation Proton protonfixes Steam System-wide Valve vkd3d Wine
Licenses: custom, BSD, MPL, LGPL, MIT, zlib
Conflicts: proton-ge-custom
Provides: proton, proton-ge-custom
Submitter: RogueGirl
Maintainer: Jaja (floriplum)
Last Packager: chaotic-aur
Votes: 277
Popularity: 6.90
First Submitted: 2020-02-21 11:06 (UTC)
Last Updated: 2026-04-06 11:55 (UTC)

Dependencies (27)

Required by (13)

Sources (5)

Pinned Comments

Latest Comments

1 2 3 4 5 6 .. 32 Next › Last »

Itara_Kitsune commented on 2026-05-15 22:20 (UTC)

Yes, I meant the actual GitHub page for Proton-GE.

The Chaotic AUR seems to have been maintained by one of the former maintainers of this AUR entry - so you'd have to ask them as to why it was archived.

aliu commented on 2026-05-15 16:38 (UTC) (edited on 2026-05-15 16:40 (UTC) by aliu)

I don't see what you mean. The last commit on the GitHub repository was last month (6 April) and it's been archived—read-only—for two weeks.

Edit: Oh, you mean Proton GE itself. I was indeed only referring to this PKGBUILD in response to shaybox.

Itara_Kitsune commented on 2026-05-15 15:56 (UTC)

Yet their github shows a change two days ago - so no, the project does not appear to be 'abandoned', aliu.

It may be 'abandoned' on chaotic AUR ... but only by the last set of maintainers.

aliu commented on 2026-05-15 15:51 (UTC) (edited on 2026-05-15 16:36 (UTC) by aliu)

It might be abandoned. The PKGBUILD used to be synced from https://github.com/chaotic-aur/pkgbuild-proton-ge-custom-bin by the chaotic-aur bot but that repository is now archived and chaotic-aur is no longer a maintainer.

I disagree that PKGBUILD rewrites are in any way bad, but I do agree that the proposed changes seem rather meaningless.

shaybox commented on 2026-05-15 15:38 (UTC)

@EpicTux123 I don’t share the same level of enthusiasm for you taking over maintenance of this package as you do. The package itself isn’t abandoned or unmaintained. While there may be reason for updating the PKGBUILD, Proton GE upstream hasn’t made a new release that would currently justify concerns about the package being orphaned.

Additionally, the changes you linked largely rewrite the file in ways that don’t inspire confidence in the package’s long-term stability. I'd rather the syntactical format of a package not change, many AUR helpers include a diff preview, rewriting the entire file is not a good idea, even if it's done in steps over time.

Also you removed all the previous co-maintainers and credits.

aliu commented on 2026-05-12 21:36 (UTC)

Could the changelog be shrunk down to, say, the past nine months? It currently clogs up my pacman -Qc output in the terminal beyond the point to which I can scroll. (The update comments could be added there too; it's a place with good visibility since it would be part of the git diff, which most AUR helpers also show.)

saghm commented on 2026-04-28 16:43 (UTC)

@EpicTux123 every comment on here is sending a separate email to every person who has ever commented on this thread before (unless they decide to unsubscribe). I'm skeptical that it's worth mentioning every change to a PKGBUILD that is not actually the official one yet here; if it does become the official package, a single comment with a "release notes" style update (maybe pinned for visibility) would be reasonable, but right now everyone who is using the current version of the package has to decide between unsubscribing and risking not getting notifications about things with the package they might find useful or tolerating emails about every small change to a PKGBUILD they might never use.

Maybe it would make more sense to post the release notes at a URL on the same server you're hosting the PKGBUILD on and then update them there each time? People who are interested can check there periodically to see what the updates are, and those who would prefer to wait until they become relevant to the official package here can remain subscribed to the updates without needing the extra info they're not looking for.

michihupf commented on 2026-04-28 11:31 (UTC)

I don't think that assuming the PKGBUILD might be corrupt is a good argument for downloading the checksum file. I must say I myself have been a bit annoyed by your comments since I got like 8 emails in the last 2 days, so that might also play a role in me being so defensive on how this package was maintained previously. I apologize for that

EpicTux123 commented on 2026-04-28 11:23 (UTC) (edited on 2026-04-28 11:26 (UTC) by EpicTux123)

Hi michihupf,

Compared to the current package, the pkgrel was bumped only once due to many other differences (such as three files not being shipped anymore). It is not live yet, since I am waiting for the orphan request to complete. So, if the package is eventually owned by me, pkgrel would've been only bumped once (and I guess Proton-GE version 10-35 would be released by then anyways).

In regards to why check it twice: because the locally downloaded file may be corrupt somehow, so checking it twice (local checksum + upstream-provided checksum) is safer. I could skip the first check since we're going to do the second anyways, but I think it's fine to keep both since it doesn't really get into the way of installing the package (it does not delay it significantly).

I am registering my progress here so users of this package can know what has been changing. If I do become the maintainer, such changes will be in one or two commits instead of multiple commits like my previous comments.

I understand your criticism of "changes for changes sake", but I wanted to document it anyways as to not later appear with different parts of the PKGBUILD all of a sudden.

And, indeed, I am quite enthusiastic about it. It's the first package I am trying to maintain, and I believe I've been doing great by following the guidelines and such. :)

Thanks.

michihupf commented on 2026-04-28 11:18 (UTC) (edited on 2026-04-28 11:18 (UTC) by michihupf)

Even though I appreciate the enthusiasm some of these changes seem to just be "changes for changes sake" not really providing anything or improving on anything. Variable changes in the PKGBUILD don't warrant a pkgrel bump imo and considering the latest comment: Why check it twice? This seems like an unnecessary step...

1 2 3 4 5 6 .. 32 Next › Last »