Package Details: qtutilities-qt6 6.14.4-1

Git Clone URL: https://aur.archlinux.org/qtutilities-qt6.git (read-only, click to copy)
Package Base: qtutilities-qt6
Description: Common Qt related C++ classes and routines used by my applications such as dialogs, widgets and models (using Qt 6)
Upstream URL: https://github.com/Martchus/qtutilities
Licenses: GPL-2-or-later
Provides: libqtutilities-qt6.so
Submitter: Martchus
Maintainer: Martchus
Last Packager: Martchus
Votes: 9
Popularity: 1.53
First Submitted: 2020-11-07 16:16 (UTC)
Last Updated: 2024-12-03 19:30 (UTC)

Dependencies (10)

Required by (7)

Sources (1)

Latest Comments

Martchus commented on 2024-12-13 11:07 (UTC) (edited on 2024-12-13 11:12 (UTC) by Martchus)

$_name == $_reponame

Not for c++utilities and I'd like to keep this set of packages uniform.

you should really take care about introducing new variables and reducing the complication of the PKGBUILD.

These "complications" are there for years and haven't caused any problems. I use them so common parts between packages are coded in a uniform way. In other packages I also use them to cover the use case of building different configurations without maintaining multiple versions of the PKGBUILD. The variable PROJECT_DIR_NAME is to cover my use case of building the package from a local archive before releasing on GitHub so I can test whether the package builds before making the release. If a significant amount of people thinks this is problematic I can disown the package and someone else can take maintainership here. Then I'll just update/use my own version on the PKGBUILDs repo on GitHub still covering my use cases. (I have nothing to gain from having this package on the AUR and will not maintain a simplified version in addition to one covering all my use cases.)

Also, since it is not a split package, you're depends=() line in package() is nothing different as the root depends=()

I usually follow what official developers do. This way of structuring the PKGBUILD is based on changes like https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/packaging/packages/ffmpeg/-/commit/91270726a5b985ab3ded65491c841adf1d1fa2ec. See the official commit message for details. I am not going to change that until I see an official change in the ffmpeg package (or a similar package) that would go in a different direction.

brli commented on 2024-12-13 02:14 (UTC)

$_name == $_reponame

you should really take care about introducing new variables and reducing the complication of the PKGBUILD.

Also, since it is not a split package, you're depends=() line in package() is nothing different as the root depends=()

Martchus commented on 2024-12-06 19:14 (UTC) (edited on 2024-12-12 14:03 (UTC) by Martchus)

@costor Arch PKGBUILDs generally don't specify the version of dependencies - unless there's a good reason. I don't see a good reason here. Simply build the packages in the correct order and don't do partial updates (which are not supported) and you'll be fine. I'm wondering why it fails, though. I don't think the latest qtutilities uses anything that was only introduced in c++utilities 5.27.0.

costor commented on 2024-12-06 17:29 (UTC)

This requires c++utilities 5.27.0 (fails with 5.26).

Martchus commented on 2023-03-09 09:49 (UTC)

See the comment on qtutilities.

manjara commented on 2023-03-09 08:02 (UTC)

Still having an issue with this package not passing validity checks, unless the checksum just hasn't been changed yet:

==> ERROR: One or more files did not pass the validity check!
error: failed to download sources for 'qtutilities-qt6-6.11.0-1':
error: packages failed to build: qtutilities-qt6-6.11.0-1

MajoranaOedipus commented on 2023-03-08 05:11 (UTC)

Hello! Please update the checksum to 8b49fabea6f86a3665c4e3e7d4a9a4d4392549ce942f5de4f21b694126fea23b, thank you

cyqsimon commented on 2022-10-05 16:26 (UTC)

I think you forgot to update the checksum for the tarball =).

Should be 59ad79da682cb626a3fb767b7f84781c4c5352e40f356d2ebd06522c62530e2c.