Package Details: hyper 3.4.1-1

Git Clone URL: https://aur.archlinux.org/hyper.git (read-only, click to copy)
Package Base: hyper
Description: A terminal built on web technologies
Upstream URL: https://hyper.is/
Keywords: hyper.js terminal
Licenses: MIT
Conflicts: hyperterm
Replaces: hyperterm
Submitter: aabmass
Maintainer: eclairevoyant
Last Packager: eclairevoyant
Votes: 63
Popularity: 0.000001
First Submitted: 2016-10-10 16:38 (UTC)
Last Updated: 2023-01-10 08:41 (UTC)

Latest Comments

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

fleischie commented on 2016-09-12 13:40 (UTC)

@aabmass @bounb The following gist contains the patch as well as the updated PKGBUILD: https://gist.github.com/fleischie/00a9789c77a336bb4bb3b1f7b5284260 I had to change the PKGBUILD slightly, because the download-URL for the hyperterm source wasn't available. Additionally I added the file to the `sources` and it's md5sum to the md5sums (via `updpkgsums`). (Sorry for responding so late.)

bounb commented on 2016-09-04 23:03 (UTC)

@aabmass the screenshots are on mac OS, where the menu bar behaves differently. I guess this is one reason why there is no official build for linux yet. the relevant issue is here https://github.com/zeit/hyperterm/issues/158

aabmass commented on 2016-09-03 00:49 (UTC)

@fleischie Hey! I was actually wondering about the menubars... It seems like they shouldn't be visible at all going by the screenshots here: https://hyperterm.org/. If the menu isn't how its supposed to look, you could probably submit the patch in a pull request to the project. Do you mind posting a link to a gist or pastebin of your patch?

fleischie commented on 2016-09-03 00:34 (UTC)

Hi @aabmass, thanks for the PKGBUILD. :) I have a request, of which I am not sure, whether it is valid/feasible: I like to autohide my electron menubars, thus I have created a patch for a specific file in the hyperterm sources. My question is: Could this possibly break the default behavior (or be inconvenient for anybody)? How do I submit the patch to you resp. the changes as a whole? Is there anything I should consider before submitting a patch? Thank you for your time. :)

aabmass commented on 2016-08-31 04:19 (UTC)

@jeysal Thanks for trying that out! I'll update the PKGBUILD then. I didn't see it was an optional dependency!

jeysal commented on 2016-08-30 17:12 (UTC)

yes, just adding the python2 makedepend works for me, since node-gyp searches for a 'python2' executable over a 'python' executable. https://github.com/nodejs/node-gyp/blob/1dcf356ca7b658789447108b29a985c00ffcf0f5/History.md#200--2015-05-24 BTW npm has a dependency "python2 (optional) - for node-gyp". I assume its optional because 99% of npm users will never use node-gyp.

aabmass commented on 2016-08-29 14:22 (UTC)

@jeysal yes, it's just that installing npm with pacman provides the node-gyp binary which doesn't depend on python2: $ pkgfile `which node-gyp` community/npm I'm also confused because I didn't have to run 'npm config set python /usr/bin/python2' to get it building. Were you able to build by just adding python2 to makedepends and then building without the npm config command?

jeysal commented on 2016-08-29 14:12 (UTC)

@aabmass npm itself and 99% of the relevant npm packages do not require python2 in any way. It's node-gyp (which is used during the hyperterm build) that requires a python2 binary. See https://github.com/nodejs/node-gyp#installation

aabmass commented on 2016-08-17 16:52 (UTC)

@jeysal that's pretty weird that its not in the dependencies for arch's npm pacakge then. I didn't ever have to point npm to /usr/bin/python2 either.

jeysal commented on 2016-08-14 17:45 (UTC)

I had the same error as bkuri, for me the problem was that node-gyp requires python 2 but only 3 was installed. I resolved the problem by adding 'python2' to makedepends and running 'npm config set python /usr/bin/python2' right before 'npm install' as suggested in node-gyp's README.

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