Search Criteria
Package Details: python-pulsectl 1:24.11.0-1
Package Actions
Git Clone URL: | https://aur.archlinux.org/python-pulsectl.git (read-only, click to copy) |
---|---|
Package Base: | python-pulsectl |
Description: | Python high-level interface and ctypes-based bindings for PulseAudio (libpulse) |
Upstream URL: | https://github.com/mk-fg/python-pulse-control |
Licenses: | MIT |
Conflicts: | python-pulse-control |
Submitter: | WorMzy |
Maintainer: | TheEdgeOfRage |
Last Packager: | TheEdgeOfRage |
Votes: | 18 |
Popularity: | 0.56 |
First Submitted: | 2020-06-29 22:42 (UTC) |
Last Updated: | 2024-11-03 11:45 (UTC) |
Dependencies (6)
- libpulse (pulseaudio-dummyAUR, libpulse-gitAUR)
- python (python37AUR, python311AUR, python310AUR)
- python-build (make)
- python-installer (python-installer-gitAUR) (make)
- python-setuptools (make)
- python-wheel (make)
Latest Comments
1 2 Next › Last »
yochananmarqos commented on 2024-04-06 17:36 (UTC)
@rokam: Don't mix local and system Python packages.
rokam commented on 2024-04-06 17:33 (UTC)
yochananmarqos commented on 2024-04-05 14:30 (UTC)
@Mysak0CZ: The pkgver had to be changed from 20.6.0 to 20.5.1 a few years ago, so an epoch had to be used.
Mysak0CZ commented on 2024-04-05 10:59 (UTC)
Hello! Can I ask if there is a reason for this package to specify
epoch=1
? This causes the version to be1:23.5.2-1
instead of simply23.5.2-1
, which also makes it take precedence over package shipped with my distribution (Manjaro). Also using epoch is strongly discouraged unless there is a really good reason to do so...yochananmarqos commented on 2023-05-06 16:34 (UTC)
@raven2cz: That is not related to packaging. Please create an upstream issue.
raven2cz commented on 2023-05-06 15:28 (UTC) (edited on 2023-05-06 15:29 (UTC) by raven2cz)
Is it really necessary to make not backward-compatible changes in API?
in volctl. It works yesterday with python 3.11. It is not possible to run it today. Is it possible to ensure backward compatibility?
yochananmarqos commented on 2021-12-13 01:56 (UTC)
@C0rn3j: No. It's up to the user to rebuild their own packages. Maybe try something like:
C0rn3j commented on 2021-12-13 00:21 (UTC) (edited on 2021-12-13 00:22 (UTC) by C0rn3j)
While not mandated by packaging standards, it'd be nice to bump up pkgrel to smooth out transition to the newly shipped Python 3.10 (this and your other python-* packages)
Thanks!
yochananmarqos commented on 2021-10-17 13:57 (UTC) (edited on 2021-10-17 13:57 (UTC) by yochananmarqos)
@mmkodali: This package does not install any files to your home directory.
mmkodali commented on 2021-10-17 08:23 (UTC)
build fails with following error.
1 2 Next › Last »