Package Details: qtwebkit 2.3.4-9

Git Clone URL: https://aur.archlinux.org/qtwebkit.git (read-only, click to copy)
Package Base: qtwebkit
Description: An open source web browser engine (Qt port)
Upstream URL: http://trac.webkit.org/wiki/QtWebKit
Licenses: GPL3, LGPL2.1
Conflicts: qt
Submitter: arojas
Maintainer: Omar007
Last Packager: Omar007
Votes: 54
Popularity: 0.102515
First Submitted: 2017-02-09 07:52 (UTC)
Last Updated: 2023-04-30 16:17 (UTC)

Sources (8)

Latest Comments

« First ‹ Previous 1 .. 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next › Last »

defkev commented on 2017-03-13 01:13 (UTC)

Took almost an hour to build on a i7-6700HQ

kullfar commented on 2017-03-12 13:08 (UTC)

I got an update today. mesa have a new dependency - libglvnd. And this package has needed symlink $ pacman -Qo /usr/lib/libGL.so /usr/lib/libGL.so is owned by libglvnd 0.2.999+g4ba53457-1 So, today I have compiled qtwebkit successfully

Viterzgir commented on 2017-03-06 18:27 (UTC)

@levitsky I'm create a symlink # ln -s /usr/lib/nvidia/libGL.so.340.102 /usr/lib/libGL.so and succesfully build package.

levitsky commented on 2017-03-03 15:16 (UTC)

I have the same problem as Viterzgir: /usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lGL What would be the proper fix for this?

FredBezies commented on 2017-02-25 07:48 (UTC)

Good luck nicepack for keeping this package alive :)

not_anonymous commented on 2017-02-24 22:05 (UTC)

Three observations; 1) This built fine but NEEDS a large space. My 1gB /tmp wasn't near large enough. <- Perhaps a note to this affect somewhere handy ?? 2) namcap qtwebkit-2.3.4-5-x86_64.pkg.tar.xz: qtwebkit E: Dependency libxslt detected and not included (libraries ['usr/lib/libxslt.so.1'] needed in files ['usr/lib/libQtWebKit.so.4.10.4'] 3) Yes I agree most assuredly !!! that PKGBUILDs (and the resulting packages) made up of binary files where a pkgbuild of source files can (and in this case IS done) should *always* have something in the name to so indicate their binary origins. *** Also, I was going to adopt this package, since it does compile. I stepped out for business and someone else got to it before I did. I am happy nonetheless. Good luck nicepack !! ( I am sure you will do fine with it. )

PhotonX commented on 2017-02-24 20:01 (UTC)

@metak: I commented in the forums, I think, this discussion is better done there.

metak commented on 2017-02-24 19:21 (UTC)

@PhotonX This in not the same as that firefox package. Its just a built package from this pkgbuild file so there's no need to re-package an already built package.

PhotonX commented on 2017-02-24 18:48 (UTC)

@metak: Could you maybe put the binary packages into the AUR so it is not necessary to use an additional repo? You know, like firefox-beta-bin, an AUR package which downloads and installs binary files.

FredBezies commented on 2017-02-24 10:38 (UTC)

Disowning package. Too much trouble for me. Feel free to adopt it.

« First ‹ Previous 1 .. 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next › Last »