search

void-linux / void-packages

The Void source packages collection
https://voidlinux.org
Other
2.5k stars 2.11k forks source link

The desktop file shipped with spotify-adblock package doesn't suit Void installation of Spotify #37596

Open JuniorSuperTux opened 2 years ago

JuniorSuperTux commented 2 years ago

Is this a new report?

Yes

System Info

Void 5.15.45_1 x86_64 GenuineIntel notuptodate rFFFFFFFF

Package(s) Affected

spotify-adblock-1.0.2_1

Does a report exist for this bug with the project's home (upstream) and/or another distro?

Nope. It's only for the Void installation of Spotify.

Expected behaviour

The desktop file entry of Spotify adblock launches Spotify normally

Actual behaviour

Linker error

Steps to reproduce

Use whatever application launcher to open the desktop entry.

Or execute the command from the desktop file:

env LD_PRELOAD=/usr/lib/spotify-adblock.so spotify %U

The execution line should be replaced with:

env LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/usr/libexec/spotify LD_PRELOAD=/usr/lib/spotify-adblock.so /usr/libexec/spotify/spotify %U
TeusLollo commented 2 years ago

Seems there's at least two bugs with current .desktop files, since there's another I posted a few days ago: https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/issues/37555

Should we merge those reports for clarity reasons, I wonder?

@paper42 Sorry for intruding, but my own bug report accessed through the link above in this comment, since it was posted two days before the new "forms" were implemented, currently lacks the "bug"/"needs-testing" flags. Is it possible to add those, or should I just close the issue and re-post? Commenting here since both issues, although technically different, are still pretty similar, and maybe should be merged. Thanks in advance.

paper42 commented 2 years ago

Seems there's at least two bugs with current .desktop files, since there's another I posted a few days ago: https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/issues/37555

Should we merge those reports for clarity reasons, I wonder?

No, that's a different bug, it's not related to this at all.

Sorry for intruding, but my own bug report accessed through the link above in this comment, since it was posted two days before the new "forms" were implemented, currently lacks the "bug"/"needs-testing" flags. Is it possible to add those, or should I just close the issue and re-post? Commenting here since both issues, although technically different, are still pretty similar, and maybe should be merged.

I will mark it manually.