Arch Linux

Please read this before reporting a bug:
https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Bug_reporting_guidelines

Do NOT report bugs when a package is just outdated, or it is in the AUR. Use the 'flag out of date' link on the package page, or the Mailing List.

REPEAT: Do NOT report bugs for outdated packages!
Tasklist

FS#10506 - lha fails to work on 64 bit system

Attached to Project: Arch Linux
Opened by Smith Dhumbumroong (zodmaner) - Monday, 26 May 2008, 14:40 GMT
Last edited by Aaron Griffin (phrakture) - Wednesday, 04 February 2009, 22:06 GMT
Task Type Bug Report
Category Packages: Extra
Status Closed
Assigned To Aaron Griffin (phrakture)
Architecture x86_64
Severity Low
Priority Normal
Reported Version 2007.08-2
Due in Version Undecided
Due Date Undecided
Percent Complete 100%
Votes 1
Private No

Details

Description:
When executed, lha on 64 bit system returns the following error:
$ lha
bash: /usr/bin/lha: No such file or directory
Even though the lha executable file is in /usr/bin directory with proper permission.

Rebuilding the lha package using abs didn't solve the problem.

I try install lha package in the 32 bit chroot on the same system, and it works perfectly. So this seems to only effect the 64 bit version of the package.

Additional info:
* package version(s)
1.17-2
* config and/or log files etc.
None

Steps to reproduce:
1. Install lha package on 64 bit system using pacman
2. Try to invoke lha or extract any .lzh archive
This task depends upon

Closed by  Aaron Griffin (phrakture)
Wednesday, 04 February 2009, 22:06 GMT
Reason for closing:  None
Additional comments about closing:  Removed package from repos
Comment by Eric Belanger (Snowman) - Monday, 26 May 2008, 16:10 GMT
That's because the PKGBUILD use a binary. From the PKGBUILD comments:
# NOTE: The upstream author does not distribute the source code unless
# registering. The binary is available w/o registration, so just to be
# careful, we'll check the binary against the MD5 computed at the time
# of this PKGBUILD.

I just checked and it's still the case. If it is not allowed to get and put the sources on archlinux.org (which I think it's the case), we could build it locally with: source=($pkgname-$pkgver.tar.gz)

Otherwise, we'll need to remove the x86_64 package for lha. Problem with that is that a community pkg (mmap) depends on it.

Damir: what do you think?
Comment by Hannes Rist (hrist) - Tuesday, 03 June 2008, 11:13 GMT
I "registered", though it's not a real registration the author just sends the code personally by mail, when I receive the code I'll ask him if it's okay to redistribute the source, or just keep it on archlinux.org to provide a working lha to the Arch64 users.

I'll comment when I have news.
Comment by john mcullan (mullman) - Sunday, 22 June 2008, 09:05 GMT
Any news on this please?
Comment by Hannes Rist (hrist) - Sunday, 22 June 2008, 09:58 GMT
Unfortunately not.

I'm not sure why we don't use 1.14, are there any major improvements from 1.14 to 1.17?
Comment by Imanol Celaya (ornitorrincos) - Wednesday, 23 July 2008, 16:04 GMT
have you repackaged lha, the pkgver and pkgrel is the same but it works here
Comment by Eric Belanger (Snowman) - Wednesday, 23 July 2008, 16:52 GMT
it wasn't repackage. Probably you have lib32-* packages on your system.
Comment by Imanol Celaya (ornitorrincos) - Wednesday, 23 July 2008, 18:37 GMT
true, nevermind
Comment by Glenn Matthys (RedShift) - Friday, 12 December 2008, 19:36 GMT
lha currently has no maintainer. Since the source is difficult to get, maybe this package should be moved to unsupported?
Comment by Eric Belanger (Snowman) - Friday, 12 December 2008, 19:45 GMT
Perhaps. At the very least, the x86_64 package should be removed as it's not working.
Comment by Eric Belanger (Snowman) - Friday, 12 December 2008, 23:48 GMT
I removed lha from x86_64. If we decide to keep the package in the repo and can make it source based, we can always readd it.

Loading...