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Do NOT report bugs when a package is just outdated, or it is in the AUR. Use the 'flag out of date' link on the package page, or the Mailing List.

REPEAT: Do NOT report bugs for outdated packages!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#11909 - makepkg using bsdtar instead of jar

Attached to Project: Arch Linux
Opened by Erwin Van de Velde (evdvelde) - Tuesday, 28 October 2008, 09:07 GMT
Last edited by Allan McRae (Allan) - Tuesday, 28 October 2008, 10:10 GMT
Task Type Bug Report
Category Packages: Core
Status Closed
Assigned To No-one
Architecture All
Severity Medium
Priority Normal
Reported Version None
Due in Version Undecided
Due Date Undecided
Percent Complete 100%
Votes 1
Private No

Details

Description:
When building cgoban3 form AUR, I get following error:

==> Extracting Sources...
-> bsdtar -x -f cgoban.jar

Additional info:
* package version(s)
pacman 3.2.1-1



Steps to reproduce:
e.g. Build cgoban3 from AUR
This task depends upon

Closed by  Allan McRae (Allan)
Tuesday, 28 October 2008, 10:10 GMT
Reason for closing:  Not a bug
Comment by Allan McRae (Allan) - Tuesday, 28 October 2008, 09:40 GMT
What is exactly wrong here (apart from cgoban3 not having "noextract=('cgoban.jar')" in the PKGBUILD)?
Comment by Erwin Van de Velde (evdvelde) - Tuesday, 28 October 2008, 09:43 GMT
bsdtar cannot extract all .jar files correctly, e.g. in this case :) (try it if you like to see the result)
jar can - of course - extract .jar files correctly
Comment by Allan McRae (Allan) - Tuesday, 28 October 2008, 10:06 GMT
Two points here:
1) the cgoban3 package is wrong as it should tell makepkg that the jar file does not need extracted
2) In cases where bsdtar fails two things should happen
- a bug report to the bsdtar developers
- use the noextract option in your PKGBUILD followed by manual extraction using jar (or unzip).

Using jar for .jar files in makepkg would add a dependency on a JDK package which will never happen.
Comment by Erwin Van de Velde (evdvelde) - Tuesday, 28 October 2008, 10:09 GMT
ok, thanks... sounds logical :)

Loading...