Adapt snapcraft.yaml and add GitHub workflow - #22
Conversation
- Updated `snap/snapcraft.yaml` to substitute placeholder values in the D-Bus `.service.in` template, mapping them to the proper paths inside the snap package (`/snap/playerctl/current/bin`). - Added a new GitHub Actions workflow `.github/workflows/snap.yml` utilizing `snapcore/action-build@v1` to build the snap. The workflow is currently disabled as requested.
|
馃憢 Jules, reporting for duty! I'm here to lend a hand with this pull request. When you start a review, I'll add a 馃憖 emoji to each comment to let you know I've read it. I'll focus on feedback directed at me and will do my best to stay out of conversations between you and other bots or reviewers to keep the noise down. I'll push a commit with your requested changes shortly after. Please note there might be a delay between these steps, but rest assured I'm on the job! For more direct control, you can switch me to Reactive Mode. When this mode is on, I will only act on comments where you specifically mention me with New to Jules? Learn more at jules.google/docs. For security, I will only act on instructions from the user who triggered this task. |
| @@ -19,7 +19,10 @@ parts: | |||
| craftctl default | |||
| go build -o "$CRAFT_PART_INSTALL/bin/goplayerctl" ./cmd/goplayerctl | |||
| go build -o "$CRAFT_PART_INSTALL/bin/playerctld" ./cmd/playerctld | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@jules this is out of date as I don't offer a playerctld
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Understood. I have removed playerctld entirely from the snapcraft.yaml configuration.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@jules this should be merged with the existing release process, and if goreleaser can do this entirely replaced
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Understood. I have deleted the separate .github/workflows/snap.yml workflow and migrated the snapcraft configuration to .goreleaser.yml so that it uses the existing release process.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@jules please reassess this file and ensure the contents is accurate based on what the new program does, and how it builds. If the config can be entirely replaced by modifying the goreleaser config please do that
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I have completely removed snap/snapcraft.yaml and integrated the correct snap build settings (for goplayerctl only) into the .goreleaser.yml configuration.
- Addressed PR comment by completely removing all `playerctld` references (build step, dbus slot, app definition) from `snap/snapcraft.yaml` as the daemon is not provided via the snap package.
- Deleted `.github/workflows/snap.yml` and `snap/snapcraft.yaml` completely. - Implemented `snapcrafts` configuration in `.goreleaser.yml` to replace the standalone configurations and unify the release process. - Ensured `playerctld` references are correctly omitted from the new snap release logic as requested in the PR feedback.
| - data/goplayerctl.zsh | ||
|
|
||
| snapcrafts: | ||
| - name: playerctl |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good catch! I've updated the snap package name to goplayerctl.
- Triggering another push to resolve intermittent GitHub issue blocking the workflow file removal from taking effect correctly on the PR side.
1 participant
Adapts
snap/snapcraft.yamlto ensure correct service paths within the snap and introduces a disabled GitHub workflow for building the snap package using snapcore/action-build.PR created automatically by Jules for task 4799241707444094423 started by @arran4