Package Details: rtl-sdr-blog-git 1:v1.3.6.r0.g240bd0e-1

Git Clone URL: https://aur.archlinux.org/rtl-sdr-blog-git.git (read-only, click to copy)
Package Base: rtl-sdr-blog-git
Description: Tuner for DVB-T sticks based on the Realtek RTL2832U, which can be used as a cheap SDR, since the chip allows transferring the raw I/Q samples to the host. RTL Blog edition to support RTL-SDR V4 dongles.
Upstream URL: https://github.com/rtlsdrblog/rtl-sdr-blog
Licenses: GPL
Conflicts: rtl-sdr, rtl-sdr-git, rtl-sdr-librtlsdr-git
Provides: rtl-sdr
Submitter: alphazo
Maintainer: Raymordius
Last Packager: Raymordius
Votes: 4
Popularity: 0.000503
First Submitted: 2023-08-26 08:32 (UTC)
Last Updated: 2025-09-23 03:37 (UTC)

Dependencies (3)

Required by (71)

Sources (2)

Latest Comments

1 2 Next › Last »

dreieck commented on 2025-10-21 15:47 (UTC)

Ahoj,

thanks for the package.

First of all, can you please remove the leading v from the package version? This actually is documented in the Arch Linux VCS packaging guidelines, that a leading v or V should not be present.

Then, the official Arch package rtl-sdr installs manpages: 

/usr/share/man/man1/rtl_adsb.1.gz
/usr/share/man/man1/rtl_eeprom.1.gz
/usr/share/man/man1/rtl_fm.1.gz
/usr/share/man/man1/rtl_power.1.gz
/usr/share/man/man1/rtl_sdr.1.gz
/usr/share/man/man1/rtl_tcp.1.gz
/usr/share/man/man1/rtl_test.1.gz

Can you install them, too?

Then, there is a feature option you could set:

-DINSTALL_UDEV_RULES=ON

... aur/rtl-sdr-blog actually has set that.

which you could enable.

And, the license identifier should be changed to be SPDX compliant: 

rtl-sdr-blog-git E: The SPDX license statement 'GPL' should be formatted as 'GPL-1.0-or-later' instead

Regards and many thanks for this package!

Raymordius commented on 2025-09-23 03:52 (UTC)

Fixed!

anatolyb commented on 2025-05-20 06:28 (UTC)

please change pkgver to: pkgver=v1.3.6.r0.g240bd0e

ape_din commented on 2024-09-13 10:03 (UTC)

im getting the same, package want to update when latest version already installed

daenney commented on 2024-07-20 12:01 (UTC) (edited on 2024-07-20 12:10 (UTC) by daenney)

I'm seeing the same behaviour @Yamashiro mentioned. I think it's because they're inconsistently tagging things

0.5.4
0.6.0
1.0
1.01
1.3.5
V1.1
V1.2
V1.3
V1.3.2
V1.3.3
V1.3.4
v0.5.0
v0.5.1
v0.5.2
v0.5.3
v0.5.4
v1.3.1
v1.3.6

Running git describe --long --tags | sed 's/\([^-]*-g\)/r\1/;s/-/./g' results in v1.3.6 and I'm guessing comparing that to the pkgver results in it being seen as older than 1.3.5 due to the surprise v.

Changing pkgver() to use git describe --long --tags | sed 's/^v//I;s/\([^-]*-g\)/r\1/;s/-/./g' seems to fix it. That cuts off the v prefix if it exists and makes it case-insensitive using the I modifier so it works for V too.

$ echo '1.3.5' | sed 's/^v//I;s/\([^-]*-g\)/r\1/;s/-/./g'
1.3.5
$ echo 'v1.3.6' | sed 's/^v//I;s/\([^-]*-g\)/r\1/;s/-/./g'
1.3.6
$ echo 'V1.3.6' | sed 's/^v//I;s/\([^-]*-g\)/r\1/;s/-/./g'
1.3.6

Yamashiro commented on 2024-06-17 16:17 (UTC) (edited on 2024-06-17 16:19 (UTC) by Yamashiro)

With the latest commit to the upstream repository this package now seems to want to upgrade every time even when already on the latest version already, when using paru at least. In fact, it seems it wants to downgrade the package: 1:v1.3.6.r0.g240bd0e-1 => 1:1.3.5.r0.g065e3d1-1.

dreieck commented on 2024-05-28 11:26 (UTC) (edited on 2024-05-28 11:26 (UTC) by dreieck)

*ping*

dreieck commented on 2024-02-19 10:33 (UTC) (edited on 2024-02-19 10:33 (UTC) by dreieck)

@alphazo, can you incorporate the suggestion from @adriatic from 2024-02-19 in your package?

Regards!

adriaticc commented on 2024-02-19 08:36 (UTC)

@dreieck you should be able to safely symlink librtlsdr.so.2 to the produced library. in other words adding something like the following to the end of the package() function:

ln -s librtlsdr.so "${pkgdir}/usr/lib/librtlsdr.so.2"

the library version is based on the output of git describe and the rtl-sdr-blog fork uses different git tags so the versions look entirely different but in practice they don't seem to have truly diverged just yet (ymmv!)

1 2 Next › Last »