search

alerque / aur

Package sources for all the AUR packages I either maintain, co-maintain, or fork.
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Unofficial_user_repositories#alerque
45 stars 26 forks source link

upgpkg: brave 1.47.186-1 #44

Closed caesarw closed 1 year ago

caesarw commented 1 year ago

Changelog

alerque commented 1 year ago

Compiling chromium: also doubles as warehouse heater.

image

caesarw commented 1 year ago

I think there's more things to discuss.

  1. Should we make the PKGBUILD to be as closely formatted as the one for chromium? Because I've seen lots of formatting differences between the two.
  2. The build for chromium is largely based on source tarball, whereas the build for brave is largely based on Git repos, which is the only way to build Brave according to the official build guide afaik. I was wondering if this would consume too much disk space and prolong build time on a build system for Arch Linux, because all the source for Brave and its dependencies will be cloned while building.
alerque commented 1 year ago

  1. Formatting is mostly a personal choice and I don't like the style of the chromium package at all, but there is also the pragmatic side: this package is clearly going to be copying changes from there frequently and the closer they are formatting wise the easier it is to diff them and understand differences. I guess I'd be willing to adopt as much of the style as makes a significant difference reading and applying diffs while still being willing to diverge anywhere it makes our live easier.

  2. This isn't a concern because the Git clones are cached. Everything in the sources=() array is fetched by the build system outside of the chroot it will later be built in and cached on the machine. This is why the Chromium clone is even shared with the chromium package because it has the same name. The builder just copies it into the chroot after updating the close, so using the Git based sources is a fine approach.