Search Criteria
Package Details: xview-64bit 3.2p1.4_25.16-1
Package Actions
Git Clone URL: | https://aur.archlinux.org/xview-64bit.git (read-only, click to copy) |
---|---|
Package Base: | xview-64bit |
Description: | an OPEN LOOK Toolkit for X Window Files |
Upstream URL: | https://sourceforge.net/projects/xview |
Licenses: | GPL |
Submitter: | malacology |
Maintainer: | malacology |
Last Packager: | malacology |
Votes: | 0 |
Popularity: | 0.000000 |
First Submitted: | 2023-04-15 13:34 (UTC) |
Last Updated: | 2023-04-15 20:37 (UTC) |
Dependencies (5)
- boost-libs
- libtirpc
- boost (boost-gitAUR) (make)
- imake (make)
- unzip (unzip-natspecAUR, unzip-zstdAUR) (make)
Latest Comments
malacology commented on 2023-07-27 15:53 (UTC)
this is not offical xview, don't make mistakes, don't spam me anymore, I will disable notification. Thanks
a821 commented on 2023-07-27 15:06 (UTC)
The thing is that
xview
(as I write this) cannot be built on arch, if you try to build it makepkg complains with==> ERROR: xview is not available for the 'x86_64' architecture.
and as I said there,i686
only packages are not allowed (*)IMHO, the options are i)
xview
being able to build bothi686
andx86_64
(iearch=(i686 x86_64)
in the PKGBUILD) or ii)xview
build onlyx86_64
and removexview-64bit
or iii) removexview
and keep this (after fixes)(*) I think that was what was agreed some time ago (but don't quote me on that); only PKGBUILD that can be ran in Arch are allowed in the AUR, not derivatives including Arch32 and ArchARM. However, maintainers are allowed to build for those architectures as long as the package can be built on vanilla Arch.
MarsSeed commented on 2023-07-27 14:44 (UTC)
I'm sorry for my misunderstanding about this package and AUR/xview.
Still, the package name is misleading. Despite the source fork repo's name being
xview-64bit
, I think this package would best be named simplyxview
, and the original upstream code that only builds 32-bit executable should be put in a package calledbin32-xview
.a821 commented on 2023-07-27 14:43 (UTC)
I think
xview-64bit
name should be allowed as it is the name used by upstream, though the upstream URL should be pointing to the github repo, IMO.Some issues: this uses git sources instead of a pinned commit or tag. There are also unquoted
$srcdir
and$pkgdir
variables, there other licenses involved, not just GPL, please double check (https://github.com/ggodd/xview-64bit#license)