feat: build rpm and deb packages in bundle-linux script #88

theDoctor commented 2026年03月11日 00:34:06 +01:00

This adds the capability to build .deb and .rpm files to the build-linux script. Although I know a flatpak build is being worked on, I always felt flatpak sandboxing makes an application like this more awkward to use. I figured offering these native package formats couldn't hurt. So far I was only able to test the resulting .deb package.
I'd be grateful for another pair of eyes on this one, shell scripting is not my strongest suit.

This adds the capability to build .deb and .rpm files to the build-linux script. Although I know a flatpak build is being worked on, I always felt flatpak sandboxing makes an application like this more awkward to use. I figured offering these native package formats couldn't hurt. So far I was only able to test the resulting .deb package. I'd be grateful for another pair of eyes on this one, shell scripting is not my strongest suit.

krig commented 2026年03月11日 00:38:39 +01:00

That's great, I also prefer using the native package manager if possible.

I will try to review this tomorrow. Great work :)

That's great, I also prefer using the native package manager if possible. I will try to review this tomorrow. Great work :)

theDoctor commented 2026年03月11日 14:44:40 +01:00

I must admit, there is a certain amount of guesswork involved. For example, I am not sure whether the automatically determined dependencies that are listed in the packages make sense. For the .deb this is:

libc6 (>= 2.39), libx11-6, libx11-xcb1 (>= 2:1.8.7), libxcb1 (>= 1.12), libxkbcommon-x11-0 (>= 0.5.0), libxkbcommon0 (>= 0.5.0), zlib1g (>= 1:1.1.4)

glibc seems reasonable but the rest is apparently mostly concerned with X11 which seems weird since I packaged it on a Wayland system? Then again, I know very little about packaging.

I must admit, there is a certain amount of guesswork involved. For example, I am not sure whether the automatically determined dependencies that are listed in the packages make sense. For the .deb this is: `libc6 (>= 2.39), libx11-6, libx11-xcb1 (>= 2:1.8.7), libxcb1 (>= 1.12), libxkbcommon-x11-0 (>= 0.5.0), libxkbcommon0 (>= 0.5.0), zlib1g (>= 1:1.1.4)` glibc seems reasonable but the rest is apparently mostly concerned with X11 which seems weird since I packaged it on a Wayland system? Then again, I know very little about packaging.

krig commented 2026年03月11日 15:27:11 +01:00

I think it's probably correct even on Wayland, but yeah I am also not super familiar with packaging wayland applications. But at least xkb is still in use with Wayland.

I think it's probably correct even on Wayland, but yeah I am also not super familiar with packaging wayland applications. But at least xkb is still in use with Wayland.

theDoctor commented 2026年03月13日 14:56:16 +01:00

Are there any objections to merging it?

Are there any objections to merging it?

krig commented 2026年03月13日 16:17:36 +01:00

No objections from me, just been a bit busy here! But it looks good, if there's any issues we can fix it before tagging the next release. Thank you!

No objections from me, just been a bit busy here! But it looks good, if there's any issues we can fix it before tagging the next release. Thank you!

theDoctor commented 2026年03月13日 17:45:41 +01:00

Sorry, take your time with things :)

Sorry, take your time with things :)