Package Details: runc-git v1.0.0.rc4.r217.ga618ab5a-1

Git Clone URL: https://aur.archlinux.org/runc-git.git (read-only, click to copy)
Package Base: runc-git
Description: Container CLI tools
Upstream URL: http://runc.io/
Keywords: container
Licenses: Apache
Conflicts: runc
Provides: runc
Submitter: irtimmer
Maintainer: etnbrd
Last Packager: etnbrd
Votes: 14
Popularity: 0.000000
First Submitted: 2015-06-24 16:25 (UTC)
Last Updated: 2018-02-12 22:11 (UTC)

Dependencies (4)

Required by (10)

Sources (1)

Latest Comments

1 2 3 Next › Last »

NonerKao commented on 2018-02-12 23:03 (UTC)

@etnbrd

Thanks for your contribution to this package. I learn a lot from your and moscar's comments, and sorry for my bad management. But still, it's my pleasure to be listed as one of the contributors.

etnbrd commented on 2018-02-12 22:39 (UTC)

Finally, to all, this is my first package as a maintainers, so we will see how it goes. Cheers :)

etnbrd commented on 2018-02-12 22:37 (UTC) (edited on 2018-02-12 22:39 (UTC) by etnbrd)

@NonerKao, in your PKGBUILD, I believe the incriminating line was actually the go install(L33), not the make(L32). go install basically:

  • builds without all the arguments that make provides, overwriting the previous build, hence removing the seccomp tags.
  • installs the newly built binary to go/bin/runc. Precisely the one you pushed into the package (L40)

@moscar, I took your version of the PKGBUILD because I like its concision and simplicity. I didn't check but I believe that with minor modifications, this PKGBUILD could be a template for almost any go binary.

I modified a few things for æsthetics. But most notably, I modified the package function, to:

  • avoid specifying runc, and
  • keep compliance with the build process proposed upstream

I take your recent silence as a refusal to maintain this package. However, if you would like to be listed as a contributor, let me know :)

NonerKao commented on 2018-01-13 12:24 (UTC)

Sorry guys, I will disown this package since I am not good enough to maintain this.

andykluger commented on 2018-01-13 07:18 (UTC)

Yes, this is broken re: seccomp. Moscar's pkgbuild saved me.

exlevan commented on 2017-11-28 10:28 (UTC)

@NonerKao The problem with missing seccomp is still present, with or without the make in build(). @moscar's PKGBUILD doesn't have this issue.

NonerKao commented on 2017-08-05 14:59 (UTC)

@moscar I have read your PKGBUILD. How about simply removing the 29th line (make in build()) in current PKGBUILD? I would like to know your oppnion on this.

NonerKao commented on 2017-08-05 14:41 (UTC)

@moscar Thanks for your advice. I'll take a look at your PKGBUILD.

moscar commented on 2017-08-05 13:22 (UTC)

There's a bug in this PKGBUILD. Running `make` will build the binary with certain options, running `go install` afterward will rebuild it without those options resulting in an unexpected binary (e.g. with seccomp disabled). I have fixed the issue and cleaned up the PKGBUILD a bit here: https://github.com/mikkeloscar/packages/blob/master/runc-git/PKGBUILD

NonerKao commented on 2017-03-28 03:49 (UTC)

@a36233 Just in case, did you tried "pacman -Syu" before you installed this package? Also, I wonder if you have done some custom setup with your golang environment that corrupts the building stage.

1 2 3 Next › Last »