Skip to content

New package: rivalcfg-4.17.0#60987

Open
uggwar wants to merge 1 commit into
void-linux:masterfrom
uggwar:rivalcfg
Open

New package: rivalcfg-4.17.0#60987
uggwar wants to merge 1 commit into
void-linux:masterfrom
uggwar:rivalcfg

Conversation

@uggwar

@uggwar uggwar commented Jun 10, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
  • I tested the changes in this PR: YES
  • This new package conforms to the package requirements: YES
  • I built this PR locally for my native architecture, (x86_64-glibc)

@tranzystorekk tranzystorekk added the new-package This PR adds a new package label Jun 10, 2026
@slymattz

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Are you sure it's licensed under Apache-2.0 and not WTFPL? Their github page says it's the latter, in which case, you should probably write WTFPL and do vlicense LICENSE in post_install()

grep -R WTFPL srcpkgs 
srcpkgs/tree-sitter-gitcommit/template:license="WTFPL"
srcpkgs/LGOGDownloader/template:license="WTFPL"
srcpkgs/WindowMaker-devel/template:license="GPL-2.0-or-later, WTFPL"
srcpkgs/WindowMaker-devel/template:     vlicense COPYING.WTFPL
srcpkgs/WindowMaker/template:license="GPL-2.0-or-later, WTFPL"
srcpkgs/WindowMaker/template:   vlicense COPYING.WTFPL
srcpkgs/fcount/template:license="WTFPL"
srcpkgs/gettext-stub-devel/template:license="WTFPL"
srcpkgs/gettext-stub/template:license="WTFPL"
srcpkgs/gohufont/template:license="WTFPL"
srcpkgs/hxtools/template:license="WTFPL AND LGPL-2.0-or-later AND GPL-2.0-or-later"
srcpkgs/hydrus/template:license="WTFPL"
srcpkgs/libcaca-devel/template:license="WTFPL"
srcpkgs/libcaca/template:license="WTFPL"
srcpkgs/lolcat-c/template:license="WTFPL"
srcpkgs/orjail/template:license="WTFPL"
srcpkgs/skroll/template:license="WTFPL"
srcpkgs/toilet/template:license="WTFPL"
srcpkgs/wifish/template:license="WTFPL"
srcpkgs/xcmenu/template:license="WTFPL"
srcpkgs/zimg-devel/template:license="WTFPL"
srcpkgs/zimg/template:license="WTFPL"
srcpkgs/zzuf/template:license="WTFPL"

@uggwar

uggwar commented Jun 10, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

Auch, you are correct. Missed that one! Thanks, will fix tonight!

@ahesford ahesford left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We don't vendor content like those udev rules, especially when they can be automatically generated by the program.

Comment thread srcpkgs/rivalcfg/template Outdated
homepage="https://github.com/flozz/rivalcfg"
distfiles="https://github.com/flozz/rivalcfg/archive/v${version}.tar.gz"
checksum=9ef0512b097ce46b77d0c74eb9c84411250c91a4dea1c77469a41bfacbe8705d
make_check=no # no tests available

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I used another project as a template and this slipped through. Will remove and test!

Comment thread srcpkgs/rivalcfg/template Outdated
maintainer="Christer Stenbrenden <christer@uggwar.net>"
license="WTFPL"
homepage="https://github.com/flozz/rivalcfg"
distfiles="https://github.com/flozz/rivalcfg/archive/v${version}.tar.gz"

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Fetching from $PYPI_SITE should be preferred, unless the GitHub tarball offers content (like tests) that are not shipped in the PyPI distribution.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks, didn't know. Will change this and see how it goes.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I really hate that hard coded path for the udev rules that it checks every time it runs. I removed the patch that changes this path, since it probably is better to just go with the application defaults. What do you think?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

new-package This PR adds a new package

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants