AUR (en) - fish-git

Search Criteria

Package Details: fish-git 2:4.0b1.r101.gd5efef1cc-1

Git Clone URL:	https://aur.archlinux.org/fish-git.git (read-only, click to copy)
Package Base:	fish-git
Description:	User friendly shell intended mostly for interactive use.
Upstream URL:	https://github.com/fish-shell/fish-shell
Keywords:	shell
Licenses:	GPL-2.0-only AND BSD-3-Clause AND ISC AND MIT AND PSF-2.0
Conflicts:	fish, fish-shell
Provides:	fish, fish-shell
Submitter:	SanskritFritz
Maintainer:	SanskritFritz (akiirui)
Last Packager:	akiirui
Votes:	72
Popularity:	3.02
First Submitted:	2010-11-17 22:27 (UTC)
Last Updated:	2024-12-31 11:05 (UTC)

Git Clone URL:

https://aur.archlinux.org/fish-git.git (read-only, click to copy)

Package Base:

fish-git

Description:

User friendly shell intended mostly for interactive use.

Upstream URL:

https://github.com/fish-shell/fish-shell

Keywords:

shell

Licenses:

GPL-2.0-only AND BSD-3-Clause AND ISC AND MIT AND PSF-2.0

Conflicts:

fish, fish-shell

Provides:

fish, fish-shell

Submitter:

SanskritFritz

Maintainer:

SanskritFritz (akiirui)

Last Packager:

akiirui

Votes:

Popularity:

3.02

First Submitted:

2010-11-17 22:27 (UTC)

Last Updated:

2024-12-31 11:05 (UTC)

Latest Comments

« First ‹ Previous 1 .. 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next › Last »

SanskritFritz commented on 2014-09-29 17:47 (UTC)

beatgammit could you read the previous comments please.

<deleted-account> commented on 2014-09-29 17:44 (UTC)

To get this to build with docker installed, I manually rm'd docker.fish in the PKGBUILD. Is this something that should be upstreamed, or should this PKGBUILD just ignore that file?

<deleted-account> commented on 2014-09-29 17:43 (UTC)

To get this to build with docker installed, I manually rm'd docker.fish. Is this something that should be upstreamed, or should this PKGBUILD just ignore that file?

SanskritFritz commented on 2014-09-24 16:13 (UTC)

I'd say fish should pull it, probably the docker people do a better job maintaining it. I certainly would choose their version, unless... :)

<deleted-account> commented on 2014-09-24 15:44 (UTC)

@SanskritFritz - which upstream should this be reported to? Docker's policy seems to be to ship completions for all shells (at least they include them in the Ubuntu PPA [1]). Since the "official" community package includes the completions, perhaps they should not be installed by this package? I'm don't really know what the best policy is here... [1] - https://github.com/docker/docker/pull/4853

SanskritFritz commented on 2014-09-24 06:59 (UTC)

Well, this is the policy of fish, it installs completions itself. On the other hand, I can understand that docker upstream thinks thy can do it better, so they provide one. This should be resolved upstream.

euclio commented on 2014-09-24 03:18 (UTC)

This package appears to conflict with docker in community. Both packages attempt to install /usr/share/fish/completions/docker.fish

SanskritFritz commented on 2014-08-09 20:14 (UTC)

Honestly, I don't know what you're saying, it builds and works here flawlessly.

lowfatcomputing commented on 2014-08-09 15:35 (UTC)

In order for this to build FISH-BUILD-VERSION-FILE needed to be generated among other things. Here is an updated PKGBUILD: http://pastebin.com/hcTKEJhq

SanskritFritz commented on 2013-10-29 12:49 (UTC)

Kamek press ctrl-z in vim and see tha error messages. Then report it upstream please if you feel there is a problem in fish. I don't have any problems running vim during my daily use.