Community Packages

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Do NOT report bugs when a package is just outdated, or it is in the AUR. Use the 'flag out of date' link on the package page, or the Mailing List.

REPEAT: Do NOT report bugs for outdated packages!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#28024 - [roxterm] Prefix badly set in the PKGBUILD, causing "file not found" runtime errors

Attached to Project: Community Packages
Opened by Joan Rieu (Fififox) - Saturday, 21 January 2012, 11:30 GMT
Last edited by Thorsten Töpper (Atsutane) - Saturday, 21 January 2012, 13:59 GMT
Task Type Bug Report
Category Packages
Status Closed
Assigned To Thorsten Töpper (Atsutane)
Architecture All
Severity High
Priority Normal
Reported Version
Due in Version Undecided
Due Date Undecided
Percent Complete 100%
Votes 0
Private No

Details

Description:
The roxterm package should be built by setting the prefix variable in the "configure" phase instead of the "install" one. This error causes the program to look for its files in "/usr/local" instead of "/usr".

Additional info:
* package version(s)
community/roxterm 2.4.2-1
* config and/or log files etc.
None needed to reproduce.

Steps to reproduce:
Run the program, its ouput shows that it cannot open some files under /usr/local/...
The files are in fact in /usr/...
It causes it not to be able to open its configuration program and settings.

Steps to correct:
In the PKGBUILD, add '--prefix=/usr' when doing 'python2 mscript.py configure' (line 23) and remove it from the install line (last one of the file).

Files:
* the PKGBUILD causing this problem
http://projects.archlinux.org/svntogit/community.git/tree/roxterm/repos/community-x86_64/PKGBUILD
* a working PKGBUILD
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/ro/roxterm-git/PKGBUILD
This task depends upon

Closed by  Thorsten Töpper (Atsutane)
Saturday, 21 January 2012, 13:59 GMT
Reason for closing:  Fixed
Comment by Karol Błażewicz (karol) - Saturday, 21 January 2012, 12:24 GMT
Is it related to  FS#28023  ?
Comment by Joan Rieu (Fififox) - Saturday, 21 January 2012, 13:39 GMT
Yeah, it's the same... This problem is the direct cause of the other one.

Loading...