packer - New bash aur+pacman wrapper (replaces poorly written yaourt)

lmello · 2013-01-14 11:03:25

Hi, newbie question - how do I add the 'aur' repository?

Miblo · 2013-01-14 11:11:58

lmello wrote:

Hi, newbie question - how do I add the 'aur' repository?

https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Ar … Repository
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/AUR_Helpers

lmello · 2013-01-22 20:33:29

Ok, now I set my EDITOR='vim' in /etc/bash.bashrc but packer still uses 'vi'... 'echo $EDITOR' pops up 'vim' as output but it's no use... I hate vi!

mloskot · 2013-03-17 01:58:55

sicpsnake wrote:

I am not sure.. Is this a bug I am seeing?

 >>> packi chromium-browser-bin
/tmp/packertmp-1001/chromium-browser-bin.PKGBUILD: line 45: msg: command not found
/tmp/packertmp-1001/chromium-browser-bin.PKGBUILD: line 48: msg2: command not found

This is an issue and it has not been handled properly so far.
As there are more and more AUR package using makepkg functions, I opened a ticket https://github.com/keenerd/packer/issues/95

mutterschiff · 2013-05-14 17:48:23

Hi,
where would be the right place to throw feature requests at the developer of packer? The github page didn't seem to exist, so I'm posting here in the hope that packer is still in development and the maintainer is reading this.

I'm sure that I'm not the only AUR user who had this issue in the past and is suffering, so here it goes.
Most of the time AUR software is build against some library on the system that is part of the regular system and updates with the normal updates. Some of these librarys are not backwards compatible, which means you have to rebuild all your software against the new version of the library. I'm not aware of any mean to automate this progress with packer - is there any?
It seems natural to me to have the pacman+aur wrapper of my choice do this job, since he could remember all dependencies of the PKGBUILDs he builds and rebuilds all affected packages if a new version of a library comes along

If packer is not in active development any more I would be thankfull for any notions of another aur wrapper who does this

edit: I read only the first post of the thread and saw a linked github after I posted, so I will place a feature request there too

Last edited by mutterschiff (2013-05-14 17:51:11)

mloskot · 2013-05-14 18:01:29

mutterschiff wrote:

Hi,
where would be the right place to throw feature requests at the developer of packer? The github page didn't seem to exist

https://github.com/keenerd/packer/issues

karol · 2013-05-14 18:03:10

Packages in the AUR should be updated, so packer can detect a new version, build and install it.
For devel packages (-git etc.) you can use '--devel' switch.

Spyhawk · 2013-05-15 12:20:56

mutterschiff wrote:

I'm sure that I'm not the only AUR user who had this issue in the past and is suffering, so here it goes.
Most of the time AUR software is build against some library on the system that is part of the regular system and updates with the normal updates. Some of these librarys are not backwards compatible, which means you have to rebuild all your software against the new version of the library. I'm not aware of any mean to automate this progress with packer - is there any?
It seems natural to me to have the pacman+aur wrapper of my choice do this job, since he could remember all dependencies of the PKGBUILDs he builds and rebuilds all affected packages if a new version of a library comes along

Interesting idea, but I'd say it is difficult to implement in a non overkill way. Afaik, none of the existing helpers do it. Ideally, the maintainer of each PKGBUILD should increment the pkgrel number at every dependency soname bump, but I guess you can't coun't on that.

On a side note, looking at the gihub repo I'm not sure packer is still maintained. It might be a good time for an avid user to take over the development or fork it. Note that there are already a few existing forks, such as meric.

Last edited by Spyhawk (2013-05-15 12:22:24)

Awebb · 2015-02-19 14:49:13

Is it just me, or... OH MY NECROBUMP!

Is it just me, or did packer drop the --auronly switch in favor of an inclusive --aur switch? How can I interact with aur packages only?

Spyhawk · 2015-02-19 15:44:05

The --auronly switch seems to still be present in the code. Also, packer users might be interested in the better maintained apacman fork.

Awebb · 2015-02-19 17:00:26

Spyhawk wrote:

The --auronly switch seems to still be present in the code. Also, packer users might be interested in the better maintained apacman fork.

Thank you! Now I have to find out how the output of packer looked like ca. 2011, when appset was last updated. Your comment helped a lot.

Roken · 2015-02-19 21:33:56

I've been using packer for all system updates for a long time, although recently on AUR packages it occasionally loses the plot after building to tmp and can't find it to install. It's not a huge probelm,. I can find the built package and install with pacman -U, but it would be nice to see it fixed.

nbd · 2015-02-20 21:15:45

Hello, is there someone using packer (or its forks) who also has used pacaur? What are the differences between the two? Pacaur has cower as a dependency for searching and downloading AUR packages and itself is 1.5 - 2 times bigger in code size. Does packer have lesser functionality than pacaur?

Zucca · 2015-11-08 11:04:24

I think Packer has its strenght in simplicity
- no configuration
- very few dependencies

On the other hand pacaur
- is fast

Can someone tell me what I'm doing wrong when I get an error complaining that I'm not allowed to preserve environment.
I'd guess that's something ralated to sudo and permissions...

Arch Linux

#676 2013-01-14 11:03:25

Re: packer - New bash aur+pacman wrapper (replaces poorly written yaourt)

#677 2013-01-14 11:11:58

Re: packer - New bash aur+pacman wrapper (replaces poorly written yaourt)

#678 2013-01-22 20:33:29

Re: packer - New bash aur+pacman wrapper (replaces poorly written yaourt)

#679 2013-03-17 01:58:55

Re: packer - New bash aur+pacman wrapper (replaces poorly written yaourt)

#680 2013-05-14 17:48:23

Re: packer - New bash aur+pacman wrapper (replaces poorly written yaourt)

#681 2013-05-14 18:01:29

Re: packer - New bash aur+pacman wrapper (replaces poorly written yaourt)

#682 2013-05-14 18:03:10

Re: packer - New bash aur+pacman wrapper (replaces poorly written yaourt)

#683 2013-05-15 12:20:56

Re: packer - New bash aur+pacman wrapper (replaces poorly written yaourt)

#684 2015-02-19 14:49:13

Re: packer - New bash aur+pacman wrapper (replaces poorly written yaourt)

#685 2015-02-19 15:44:05

Re: packer - New bash aur+pacman wrapper (replaces poorly written yaourt)

#686 2015-02-19 17:00:26

Re: packer - New bash aur+pacman wrapper (replaces poorly written yaourt)

#687 2015-02-19 21:33:56

Re: packer - New bash aur+pacman wrapper (replaces poorly written yaourt)

#688 2015-02-20 21:15:45

Re: packer - New bash aur+pacman wrapper (replaces poorly written yaourt)

#689 2015-11-08 11:04:24

Re: packer - New bash aur+pacman wrapper (replaces poorly written yaourt)

Board footer