Package Details: gnome-terminal-fedora 3.34.0-1

Git Clone URL: (read-only)
Package Base: gnome-terminal-fedora
Description: The GNOME Terminal Emulator with Fedora patches
Upstream URL:
Keywords: dark gnome notifications notify patched terminal transparency transparent
Licenses: GPL
Groups: gnome
Conflicts: gnome-terminal
Provides: gnome-terminal=3.34.0
Submitter: BerelTarMaciltur
Maintainer: mydongistiny
Last Packager: mydongistiny
Votes: 58
Popularity: 0.89
First Submitted: 2015-03-29 22:28
Last Updated: 2019-10-04 02:58

Required by (10)

Sources (4)

Latest Comments

1 2 3 4 5 6 ... Next › Last »

mydongistiny commented on 2019-10-04 03:00

I took ownership and updated it to 3.34.0 and I also updated vte3-notification to 0.58.0.

dsboger commented on 2019-07-01 16:23

@mydongistiny It's been a few months since I've disowned this package. @ljmf00 is the current maintainer.

mydongistiny commented on 2019-06-30 22:58

@dsboger can you orphan this package so I can take ownership? I've updated it for now here:

If anyone wants to build it. I've also took ownership and updated vte3-notification on aur.

dsboger commented on 2019-03-12 00:17

Hi community. I'm sorry to say that I'm not having enough time to maintain this and other AUR packages anymore. I'm disowning this in hopes that someone else will give it the love it deserves. Cya!

dsboger commented on 2018-02-20 14:51

@purejava should be fixed now. Thanks for reporting!

purejava commented on 2018-02-20 13:28

Package fails with 403 on downloading _fpatchfile1: curl: (22) The requested URL returned error: 403 Forbidden

==> FEHLER: Fehler beim Download von

dsboger commented on 2017-09-19 14:13

@hpstg I've tested just now and both vte3-notification and gnome-terminal-fedora built without issues. Can you describe in more detail what problem you faced? What step failed? What error messages were displayed? Thanks for reporting!

hpstg commented on 2017-09-19 13:06

Unfortunatelly the package won't build because vte3 won't pass a check.

hoschi commented on 2017-04-27 09:37

That's fine, I also don't see a big issue. Probably the developers or officall maintainers of Archlinux change their mind and explicitly use base or base-devel as 'dependes' or 'makedepends'.

dsboger commented on 2017-04-27 02:34

@hoschi @SunRed I've read some debate on that topic. True, we may assume base-devel is installed, but then why not make it explicit in, say, pacman? Relying on common assumption and a wiki page seems a brittle foundation to me, specially considering we have a dependency resolution mechanism in place, and SunRed tasted one of its shortcomings. My opinion is not strong, since it is a small matter, but I have yet to see a good reason for omitting deps, beyond "we assume..." or "it is in the wiki". So... I'll leave it as it is, because inertia.