Proposed PKGBUILD for gimp-gap

ElMastro · 2015-12-02 21:14:07

I made a new PKGBUILD for the package gimp-gap, wich is missing.
It is probably wise to test it before moving it in AUR, where it can find a Mantainer.

Maintainer: Unknown <the_maxtro@hotmail.it>
pkgname=gimp-gap
pkgver=2.6.0
pkgrel=2
pkgdesc="Proposed Package for gimp-gap"
url="https://www.gimp.org/tutorials/Using_GAP/"
arch=('x86_64' 'i686')
license=('GPLv3')
depends=('gimp>=2.6.0' 'glib2')
optdepends=('libxvid' 'libbz2' 'libfaac' 'libfaad' 'libmp3lame' 'libx264')
#makedepends=()
#conflicts=()
#replaces=()
#backup=()
#install='foo.install'
source=("http://download.gimp.org/pub/gimp/plug-ins/v2.6/gap/${pkgname}-${pkgver}.tar.bz2")
md5sums=('249ed829de8b78675c0fe4ef4212089f')

build() {
  cd "${srcdir}/${pkgname}-${pkgver}"
#  cmake ./ -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=/usr
 ./configure CC="gcc" CXX="g++" LDFLAGS=-lm 
 cmake
 make
}

package() {
  cd "${srcdir}/${pkgname}-${pkgver}"
  make DESTDIR="${pkgdir}" install
}

# vim:set ts=2 sw=2 et:

It is good if someone provides feedback or move it to AUR

WorMzy · 2015-12-02 21:23:29

Moving to AUR discussion.

Why don't you want to maintain it yourself?

fukawi2 · 2015-12-02 22:00:39

ElMastro wrote:

...where it can find a Mantainer.
....
It is good if someone provides feedback or move it to AUR

The AUR is maintained by the general public -- IOW, you can create your own account and maintain it yourself. The dumping of PKGBUILD's into the AUR by people unwilling to maintain them is discouraged. If it's not important enough to maintain, then it's not important enough to be in the AUR.

As far as feedback goes:
1. put a proper description into $pkgdesc
2. add descriptions to each of the optdepends()
3. remove all the commented variables

Other than that it looks pretty reasonable.

ElMastro · 2015-12-03 21:10:12

Fine, I just believed that since it involves gimp, a more experienced mantainer would prefer to do the job.

I'll clean it, move it in Aur, and Mantain it as long as it works.

fukawi2 · 2015-12-03 22:23:58

ElMastro wrote:

Fine, I just believed that since it involves gimp, a more experienced mantainer would prefer to do the job.

The theory of the AUR is "many hands make light work". Having the community assist in maintaining packages (even "inexperienced" people) helps Arch have one of, if not the, largest package repositories available. The community is always available to assist if you come across something you're not sure about or a problem you can't fix on your own

respiranto · 2015-12-03 23:04:44

fukawi2 wrote:

Having the community assist in maintaining packages (even "inexperienced" people) helps Arch have one of, if not the, largest package repositories available.

Sorry for hijacking the thread, but I just checked:

Number of packages in official repositories: 16,402 [0]
Number of packages in AUR: 30,098 [1]
Sum: 46,500

Number of official Debian packages (including non-free and contrib): 43,000+ [2]
Number of official Ubuntu packages (2012); 39,377 [3]
Number of official Fedora packages: 17,608 [4]
Number of official Gentoo packages: 18,746 [5]

I couldn't find any such number for Slackware, but it looks like you are right.
However it's questionable, how e.g. Ubuntus PPAs would count.

[0] https://www.archlinux.de/?page=RepositoryStatistics
[1] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/?O=0&K=
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debian#Features
[3] http://askubuntu.com/questions/120630/h … repository
[4] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/stats/
[5] https://packages.gentoo.org/

fukawi2 · 2015-12-03 23:13:02

Nice research

respiranto wrote:

However it's questionable, how e.g. Ubuntus PPAs would count.

If you're going to include PPA's, then you should include all the other unofficial Arch repos that exist around the net (eg, an incomplete list: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Un … ositories) to compare apples and apples

ElMastro · 2015-12-04 10:50:45

The package has been Upload to AUR.

I agree with respiranto, I've had Debian,Ubuntu,Knoppix,Slackware,gentoo and others, but I'm pretty sure that pacman is pretty reliable, and I don't remember finding a program it haven't been possible to install, and the system is generally cleaner.

Awebb · 2015-12-04 11:08:36

Don't worry about uploading packages to the AUR. If there is anything wrong or if anything can be enhanced, people will post it as comments.

respiranto · 2015-12-04 12:30:14

fukawi2 wrote:

If you're going to include PPA's, then you should include all the other unofficial Arch repos that exist around the net (eg, an incomplete list: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Un … ositories) to compare apples and apples

I'd assume that most of the packages in the unofficial repositories also exist in the AUR, so are not to be counted.
However this raises another issue - Some respositories, including Arch's AUR, contain several versions of package, so one would have to eliminate those as well.
I might write a script to do so - someday, when I have nothing else to do.

Arch Linux

#1 2015-12-02 21:14:07

Proposed PKGBUILD for gimp-gap

#2 2015-12-02 21:23:29

Re: Proposed PKGBUILD for gimp-gap

#3 2015-12-02 22:00:39

Re: Proposed PKGBUILD for gimp-gap

#4 2015-12-03 21:10:12

Re: Proposed PKGBUILD for gimp-gap

#5 2015-12-03 22:23:58

Re: Proposed PKGBUILD for gimp-gap

#6 2015-12-03 23:04:44

Re: Proposed PKGBUILD for gimp-gap

#7 2015-12-03 23:13:02

Re: Proposed PKGBUILD for gimp-gap

#8 2015-12-04 10:50:45

Re: Proposed PKGBUILD for gimp-gap

#9 2015-12-04 11:08:36

Re: Proposed PKGBUILD for gimp-gap

#10 2015-12-04 12:30:14

Re: Proposed PKGBUILD for gimp-gap

Board footer