You are not logged in.
Would like to install Signal. There are two packages that look very similar in the AUR.
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/signal-desktop-bin
This one seems to pull from the .deb release.
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/signal
Does anyone understand the differences between the two, have experience using Signal with one of the other, or have a suggestion as to which to use?
Last edited by schnappijedi (2018-08-26 16:58:10)
Offline
My preference would be the use the one you compile from source; not a fan of pre-compiled binaries in AUR packages.
Offline
Although love Linux and especially Arch am not yet at that point of knowledge. Will learn eventually for fun and growth of knowledge but time is not something that have currently.
Last edited by schnappijedi (2018-08-26 15:17:20)
Offline
What "point of knowledge" do you think is required? Building either package should require the exact same knowledge - and even the exact same commands. The only difference is that the one built from source will take a little longer (longer to build, but you don't need to do anything - just sit and wait).
"UNIX is simple and coherent" - Dennis Ritchie; "GNU's Not Unix" - Richard Stallman
Offline
Do not know how to build packages from source. Maybe do since use "makepkg" on file then "pacman" when using AUR. Call this "installing," maybe it is synonymous with "compiling from source." Will figure all that out in years to come.
For now if anyone knows the difference between the Signal AUR packages let me know and will take it from there. If not will do what always do in similar situations and try both.
@graysky seems to be advocating installing the package from here directly: https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Desktop/releases
Probably best choice but dependencies issues, updates, ect make it easier to use AUR packages.
Last edited by schnappijedi (2018-08-26 16:42:57)
Offline
No graysky did not advocate that but as you do not understand the difference between a bin package and one built from source you appear to have misunderstood.
The one from source would be https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/signal
The pre-compiled binary would be https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/signal-desktop-bin
makepkg packages them both but in the none bin case it builds the target rather than just repacking it.
Edit:
grammar from not for.
Last edited by loqs (2018-08-26 16:51:09)
Offline
For now if anyone knows the difference between the Signal AUR packages let me know and will take it from there. If not will do what always do in similar situations and try both.
This is what both Graysky and I just answered above.
graysky seems to be advocating installing the package from here directly: https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Desktop/releases
No, Graysky was saying to use the second AUR package you linked to over the "signal-desktop-bin" package.
Probably best choice but dependencies issues, updates, ect make it easier to use AUR packages.
That would not be a "best choice": Always use a PKGBUILD, and if one is available in the AUR, use that. In this case, Graysky and I are simply answering your question: use the PKGBUILD that builds from source, not the one that repackages a debian package.
Last edited by Trilby (2018-08-26 16:52:22)
"UNIX is simple and coherent" - Dennis Ritchie; "GNU's Not Unix" - Richard Stallman
Offline
Understood. Thank you all.
This is the "best choice" Signal package to use from the AUR:
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/signal
Offline
Most likely, yes.
But again, it might take a while to build if it is large software. That is likely why the signal-desktop-bin package exists so users of older computers can install without having to wait for the compilation to finish.
"UNIX is simple and coherent" - Dennis Ritchie; "GNU's Not Unix" - Richard Stallman
Offline