Package Details: spideroak-one 7.5.0-1

Git Clone URL: https://aur.archlinux.org/spideroak-one.git (read-only, click to copy)
Package Base: spideroak-one
Description: Secure file backup, sync and sharing client. This provides the client for SpiderOakONE.
Upstream URL: https://crossclave.com/
Keywords: backup
Licenses: custom
Conflicts: spideroak, spideroak-beta
Provides: spideroak
Replaces: spideroak
Submitter: warnem2
Maintainer: mbc
Last Packager: mbc
Votes: 269
Popularity: 0.004367
First Submitted: 2015-07-18 19:17 (UTC)
Last Updated: 2023-09-04 21:57 (UTC)

Latest Comments

« First ‹ Previous 1 .. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 .. 27 Next › Last »

<deleted-account> commented on 2012-09-20 09:42 (UTC)

@cfr42 SpiderOak isn't supported on Arch so email will, understandably, not get you very far. Try running it headless and see what happens. You will find that hdd and cpu go up as it works naturally. I don't use KDE but LXDE so I can't help with that. Also try a different pkgbuild below to see if you have better luck. Perhaps using a version of SpiderOak that might run on KDE could help. Nobody seems to agree on the dependencies for this so try adding openssl if you don't have that already.

cfr42 commented on 2012-09-20 01:59 (UTC)

I tried this out and found that various aspects of the GUI just did nothing (e.g. buttons having no effect; links to help etc. not working including for the forums which makes it impossible to use them to research the problem without giving my password over the web...). On reboot, my laptop went insane. Temperatures way up, cpu going crazy. Quitting the application didn't kill all the bits but helped. Killing the rest instantly started bringing things under control. (I then uninstalled and rebooted just to be certain.) Since I can't access the forums without giving my password over the web (which I'd rather not) and since email support has so far yielded nothing, I just wondered if this was a known issue or if there's a work around. I'm using x86_64 with KDE; everything from standard repos (no testing) except a handful of things from AUR.

ava1ar commented on 2012-08-26 13:59 (UTC)

Hi, @dkaylor Sorry, it was my mistake. I used PKKBUILD by @liolomau without proper verification of it. Will try to avoid of such things in future.

dkaylor commented on 2012-08-26 08:15 (UTC)

@ava1ar: You didn't answer my question, but obviously removed [ "$CARCH" = 'x86_64' ] && depends+=(gcc-libs-multilib) from the PKGBUILD and bumped the pkgrel You need to point that out to anyone who may have gone ahead with the update from -1 to -2 on x86_64 and replaced gcc-libs with gcc-libs-multilib unnecessarily in the process. And you really should explain why you thought that was necessary, since this package has no build() function at all. If it was just a simple mistake, just admit to that and move on, no big deal, it happens to maintainers all the time.

dkaylor commented on 2012-08-25 03:20 (UTC)

Why is [ "$CARCH" = 'x86_64' ] && depends+=(gcc-libs-multilib) needed? I commented it out just to see what would happen, package installed successfully and is currently working just fine.

ava1ar commented on 2012-08-24 03:32 (UTC)

No difference at this moment, but there are two separate channels for stable and beta versions and they are usually different.

<deleted-account> commented on 2012-08-24 03:29 (UTC)

if both the -expetimental and this package have the same ver...what is the difference??

ava1ar commented on 2012-08-24 01:19 (UTC)

updated

ava1ar commented on 2012-08-23 19:34 (UTC)

Hi, luolimao I just adopted PKGBUILD and did not do any serious changes there :) Thanks for the update, I will incorporate them into PKGBUILD shortly.

luolimao commented on 2012-08-23 13:40 (UTC)

Some of the commands in the PKGBUILD were also out of order, so I fixed that as well.

« First ‹ Previous 1 .. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 .. 27 Next › Last »