Overclock.net banner

Need help with PKGBUILD/makepkg, getting errors (Arch)

2.2K views 10 replies 4 participants last post by  Plan9  
#1 ·
I'm back to seek your guidance o' great masters.

I've been trying to download packages from AUR and build them myself, in several different locations on my PC, and neither of them are working. I can't manage to find anything to help me with google, (I might just be bad with it) so now I'm here.

I followed the guide for ABS on the arch wiki, to no help. Twice. First I tried having the build in
~/abs/ Didnd't work, then I tried:
/var/abs/local/ Didn't work.

Everytime I've tried I have gotten the message:
Quote:
ERROR: You do not have write permission to create packages in ~/abs/alsaequal or /var/abs/local/alsaequal .
Aborting...
As you could've figured out, Alsaequal is the program I'm trying to install. And I also got another question related to that.

I was told this:
Quote:
If you have a x86_64-system and are using a 32bit-flashplugin the sound in flash will not work. Either you have to disable alsaequal or build alsaequal for 32bit.
But I have no idea how to go about doing that either. Tried downloading what I thought were 32bit stuff from AUR to see if anything was different in the PKGBUILD, but I didn't learn anything from it.

I'd really appreciate some help with this, as it is currently the main problem holding me back.
Thanks for any and all advice/help I might get for this.
 
#3 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by chemicalfan View Post

You are running makepkg as root, right?
I tried, but I only got the message:
Quote:
==> ERROR: Running makepkg as root is a BAD idea and can cause permanent, catastrophic damage to your system. If you wish to run as root, please use the --asroot option.
When I got that message, combined with the guide telling me to run it like this:

Code:

Code:
$ makepkg -s
I just figured I was doing something wrong. I'm pretty sure I read somewhere in the wiki aswell that running it as root could be bad. Now I'm not sure anymore. How should I run it?
 
#4 ·
True, it shouldn't need to be done, but it would overcome the permission issue. Sorry, it was a quick response.

Ok, let dig a bit deeper - have you managed to build anything using makepkg before? Is your system up-to-date (or at least, the build toolchain, and the dependencies for alsaequal)?

You should probably start by removing those folders in case there's something funny going on. You should always build in a subfolder of ~ to try to avoid permission issues or other problems
 
#6 ·
Uhm, ABS isn't the AUR... if what I'm reading is correct. But other than that, it shouldn't be hard. As to the problem with Flash, don't use a 32bit flash plugin. There is a 32bit and a 64bit one in the Arch repos.

Code:

Code:
# wget http://aur.archlinux.org/packages/alsaequal/alsaequal.tar.gz

# tar zxvf alsaequal.tar.gz

# cd alsaequal/

# makepkg -i

# rm -rf alsaequal*
Normally how I go about installing from the AUR. Or you can use an AUR pacman wrapper like suggested above YAOURT, CLYDE, Etc.
 
#9 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shrak View Post

I think the OP is just confusing... at least to me. First talking about following a guide for ABS, but then says the package is in the AUR... who knows maybe I just need to get more than an hour or 2 of sleep a night and my brain wouldn't be so bad
biggrin.gif
I have been confusing myself just as much. What I wanted was to install packages from AUR, but when I was reading how to do it I somehow ended up on the ABS guide and just thought I had to use it to install them.

I got it to work aswell, I managed to install alsaequal and caps, but after that I have been running into the same problem again. :/ Sometimes it just seems to work, and others not. I have done it exactly the same way everytime aswell.
 
#10 ·
The AUR and ABS are very similar, the difference is that the packages in ABS are the source packages of the official Arch repos, whereas the AUR are user-submitted (i.e. unofficial). The other way to look at the AUR is the same as Slackbuilds.

If it's behaving inconsistantly, it's likely to be some kind of incompatibility with your set-up. You can't really report it to the maintainer unless you can isolate the cause (i.e. if you load Firefox before, or something like that). All you can do is hope that is gets resolved when packages are updated (and it could be ANY package on your system). Welcome to the world of rolling release
wink.gif