Package Details: reg 0.16.0-1

Git Clone URL: https://aur.archlinux.org/reg.git (read-only)
Package Base: reg
Description: Docker registry v2 command line client and repo listing generator with security checks
Upstream URL: https://github.com/genuinetools/reg
Licenses: MIT
Submitter: sinisterstuf
Maintainer: luzifer
Last Packager: luzifer
Votes: 2
Popularity: 0.000018
First Submitted: 2018-03-13 18:06
Last Updated: 2019-01-25 19:55

Dependencies (1)

Required by (0)

Sources (1)

Latest Comments

sinisterstuf commented on 2018-07-16 06:04

Thanks for the feedback, I'll try to get round to it soon. To be honest I've been expecting someone to complain about the name, this was supposed to be a source build but the set-up for that was a bit difficult, so I skipped it at the time. Will fix. Thanks for the hint with the source renaming, learnt something new.

eigengrau commented on 2018-06-18 12:59

One additional request: the source files listed in the PKGBUILD are currently not unique for the package and the specific version. makepkg instead expects that source file names somehow encode the package name and version. When that is not the case, people who have source caching enabled in makepkg.conf will run into issues, because the cache already contains a «LICENSE» file or an old «reg-linux-amd64» file and the checksums will not match.

You can specify a custom download name for the file like this:

source=("$pkgname-$pkgver.tar.gz::<https://github.com/coder/program/archive/v>$pkgver.tar.gz")

Cf. the wiki.

eigengrau commented on 2018-06-18 12:55

Thanks for packaging this! I notice that the PKGBUILD is installing a binary build of reg instead of building from source. Would you care renaming this to «reg-bin» instead, which is the naming convention for binary packages. Otherwise, people might expect this to be a source build. Renaming a package just entails uploading the PKGBUILD under the new name and sending a mail to the aur-general mailing list with a request to merge the old package into the new (this will preserve your package votes and stats).

Alternatively, building this package from source would be just as fine.

King regards, S.