Search Criteria
Package Details: linphone-desktop-appimage 5.2.6-1
Package Actions
Git Clone URL: | https://aur.archlinux.org/linphone-desktop-appimage.git (read-only, click to copy) |
---|---|
Package Base: | linphone-desktop-appimage |
Description: | A free VoIP and video softphone based on the SIP protocol (AppImage version) |
Upstream URL: | https://www.linphone.org |
Keywords: | voip |
Licenses: | GPL2 |
Conflicts: | linphone-desktop-all, linphone-desktop-all-git, linphone-desktop-git, linphone-git |
Provides: | linphone, linphone-desktop |
Submitter: | lynix |
Maintainer: | lynix |
Last Packager: | lynix |
Votes: | 12 |
Popularity: | 0.000012 |
First Submitted: | 2020-04-19 07:00 (UTC) |
Last Updated: | 2024-07-23 08:03 (UTC) |
Dependencies (1)
Required by (2)
- linphone-plugin-msx264 (requires linphone)
- lpclic (requires linphone)
Latest Comments
1 2 3 4 5 6 Next › Last »
Flupp commented on 2024-04-08 08:34 (UTC)
Version 5.2.3-2 works for me too. Thanks!
bossi commented on 2024-04-03 08:43 (UTC)
@lynix: Excellent! I'm glad I could help. The new release builds and runs just fine. It sounds like the
debug
flag was disabled by default previously, which would explain why it hadn't had to be disabled explicitly in the package, or was it always enabled by default and your machine-local overrides are for other reasons?lynix commented on 2024-04-03 06:52 (UTC)
@bossi: Excellent, thanks for your work identifying the issue!
Yes, 'debug' is now default in /etc/makepkg.conf. I've got it disabled on all my machines, which explains why I'm not seeing the issue.
I will push a -2 with '!debug' in the PKGBUILD shortly.
bossi commented on 2024-04-02 13:20 (UTC)
I've tracked down what's stripping the binary still, even though
!strip
is specified as an option inPKGBUILD
and it turns out it still is the strip script (/usr/share/makepkg/tidy/strip.sh
), which strips the binary down to debug symbols if only!strip
is specified, it seems. Also setting!debug
fixes the issue (options=(!strip !debug)
).It looks like pacman has had some work done on its debug option recently (https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/packaging/packages/pacman/-/commits/main), maybe that's where a possible regression was introduced since I'm puzzled it assumes the debug option as a default here.
bossi commented on 2024-04-02 03:27 (UTC) (edited on 2024-04-02 03:42 (UTC) by bossi)
A brief look into what might be going on shows that
build()
andpackage()
seem to return good results (the .AppImage doesn't get truncated - or whatever's going on). That leads me to believe that something is possibly stripping it (?) in the subsequent actions that makepkg is taking.Not sure how to debug them but, like I said above, the output of
package()
looks good to me.P.S.: To clarify, the results of
package()
look good when run manually. Looking at thepkg
folder thatmakepkg
produces, however, show a tampered result ofpackage()
- the.AppImage
is stripped to ~100KiB; I'm assuming that it must be a result of whatevermakepkg
is doing to$pkgdir
contents post build.bossi commented on 2024-04-02 00:30 (UTC) (edited on 2024-04-02 02:36 (UTC) by bossi)
To contribute a sample: Same AppImage error here.
An observation - note the file size:
CFP commented on 2024-04-01 17:00 (UTC)
I can confirm @Flupp's error message. I get the same error message ("This doesn't look like a squashfs image."), linphone does not start. Same with re-install and stable version.
lynix commented on 2024-03-28 13:17 (UTC)
Flupp: I'm sorry, cannot reproduce your issue. Used 'yay' as well to do a fresh build, runs as expected.
Flupp commented on 2024-03-18 12:47 (UTC)
Since the update to 5.2.1-3 (from 5.2.0-2), I get the following error. I use yay for installation. Cleanbuilding did not help.
bossi commented on 2024-02-12 14:08 (UTC) (edited on 2024-02-13 09:49 (UTC) by bossi)
@jsimon0: Out of interest: Is another bump of both
.PKGBUILD
's and.SRCINFO
'spkgrel
to3
strictly necessary or would it suffice to only bringPKGBUILD
'spkgrel
up to2
to be in sync with.SRCINFO
? No client should have3.2.1-2
installed, so the only (hypothetical) reason I can think of is that a(nother) bump of.SRCINFO
would be required if that's what is necessary for the package managers to pull master again (which I'd tend to doubt - I'd guess that AUR repos always get pulled before the build but that's a guess).1 2 3 4 5 6 Next › Last »