Package Details: starship-bin 0.47.0-1

Git Clone URL: (read-only, click to copy)
Package Base: starship-bin
Description: The cross-shell prompt for astronauts
Upstream URL:
Licenses: ISC
Conflicts: starship
Provides: starship
Submitter: chipbuster
Maintainer: chipbuster (starship-bot)
Last Packager: starship-bot
Votes: 15
Popularity: 2.28
First Submitted: 2019-08-23 17:20
Last Updated: 2020-11-15 17:42

Latest Comments

1 2 Next › Last »

yaymukund commented on 2020-10-31 13:40

@pepper_chico Starship seems to be trying to show the OCaml module. See for why that might be.

pepper_chico commented on 2020-09-30 17:09

Does starship depends on ocaml now? I'm always getting this warning after last release:

[WARN] - (starship::utils): Executing command "ocaml" failed by: Os { code: 2, kind: NotFound, message: "No such file or directory" }

AppleGamer22 commented on 2020-09-30 05:38

When updating to version 0.45.0 on my Manjaro installation, I noticed from the starship --version log that the update did not propagate. After uninstalling with yay -R starship-bin, I noticed that the starship binaries are still available through the starship command.

chipbuster commented on 2019-12-04 04:52

Hey all, the 0.27.0 release (and the 0.26.5 release as well) are being delayed over failures in the test suite for the git branch module (in the source-based package). I'd like to see this release ASAP, but I don't think it's worth pushing a broken prompt over.

I'll get this released as soon as I can figure out why a large number of git branch tests are failing!

chipbuster commented on 2019-11-03 23:41

@quebin31 that's a known bug in makepkg at the moment, see e.g. for more details and short-term fixes

quebin31 commented on 2019-10-28 03:51

As a side note, I've been receiving warnings from makepkg about the format of your email, maybe you should take it into consideration.

==> WARNING: PACKAGER should have the format 'Example Name <email@address.invalid>'

chipbuster commented on 2019-10-16 16:16

Got it, that makes total sense. Thanks a bunch.

toyarchery commented on 2019-10-16 14:40

Problem with upstream package naming is that there's no version difference, so AUR helpers might assume the package was already made without checking the checksum

This way each package gets a unique name, which also makes it easier to manage and more consistent with other packages

lightning1141 commented on 2019-10-16 14:38

if you don't rename the package, checksum will failed when you upgrade it, cause most aur tools will use the cached package.

Warning: The downloaded source filename must be unique because the SRCDEST directory can be the same for all packages. For instance, using the version number of the project as a filename potentially conflicts with other projects with the same version number. In this case, the alternative unique filename to be used is provided with the syntax source=('unique_package_name::file_uri'); e.g. source=("$pkgname-$pkgver.tar.gz::$pkgver.tar.gz").

chipbuster commented on 2019-10-16 14:31

@lightning1141 Happily done for the 0.25.0 version bump.

I'm a little new to making packages--do you have a link explaining the syntax or why this should be done? I didn't find anything about it on the wiki page about creating packages.