Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Archlinux pkgbuild #115

Open
dlintw opened this issue Jun 20, 2014 · 4 comments
Open

Archlinux pkgbuild #115

dlintw opened this issue Jun 20, 2014 · 4 comments

Comments

@dlintw
Copy link

dlintw commented Jun 20, 2014

please check https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/wingo-git/

I've posted a updated PKGBUILD. https://gist.github.com/dlintw/4ea9d3fd17c6ba1cbbd5

  1. Separate the package() function
  2. Use git version as package's
  3. Limited the arch (this is not script, I think 'any' is not proper).
@vendion
Copy link

vendion commented Nov 18, 2014

I think arch=(x86_64 i686) is too restrictive though, I was able to build and run Wingo on a Raspberry Pi which is a ARM device.

@BurntSushi
Copy link
Owner

Agreed. I got Wingo running on a Pi way back when the Go toolchain first start supporting ARM.

Go's toolchain supports a wide variety of architectures. Certainly more than what Arch can run on (AFAIK).

The other changes are good though... Just have to get around to updating it.

@dlintw
Copy link
Author

dlintw commented Nov 19, 2014

Limited the arch, this is not script, I think 'any' is not proper.
It is OK to add more arch=(i686 x86_64 arm ...)
Because if you share your i686 build binary package file to other arm based machine, the package won't workable.

@darthlukan
Copy link
Contributor

Agreed, supported architectures should be listed.

On Wed, Nov 19, 2014, 04:12 Daniel YC Lin notifications@github.com wrote:

Limited the arch, this is not script, I think 'any' is not proper.
It is OK to add more arch=(i686 x86_64 arm ...)
Because if you share your i686 build binary package file to other arm
based machine, the package won't workable.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#115 (comment).

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants