You're viewing the New Reddit. You can always visit Old Reddit or just 
Press J to jump to the feed. Press question mark to learn the rest of the keyboard shortcuts
8
Archived

st package removed?

It looks like st was recently removed from the Arch repository. I tried doing some searching, but was unable to find what the reason for this was. Does anyone have any insight on this topic? I was under the impression that st 0.7 was quite stable, well-liked, and really didn't require any significant maintenance.

Obviously, I know I can grab st-git from the AUR, but I try to avoid using packages from the AUR whenever possible, especially since this one appears to have some weird bug where the cursor is set to red.

18 comments
83% Upvoted
This thread is archived
New comments cannot be posted and votes cannot be cast
level 1
[deleted]
8 points · 9 months ago

i guess it doesn't make sense to ship compiled - ironically i was tracking via asp on all my machines...

dwm is also out of the repo, i wasn't watching though, and don't know if this corresponds.

level 2
Original Poster1 point · 9 months ago

Personally, I've had great success using the provided binary as-is with no modifications. Plenty of other mainstream distros provide it, as well.

Anyway, I guess I'm primarily confused as to why it was removed. It was still up-to-date with the latest released version.

level 3
Developer7 points · 9 months ago · edited 9 months ago

/u/ortango is on point here. We decided that it makes no sense to ship package that in general is expected to be recompiled with one's config.

level 1
4 points · 9 months ago

I noticed this yesterday, too. I don't use the (old) official st package, but instead roll my own, but then pacaur started telling me:

:: st is not present in the AUR -- skipping

so that's how I noticed that st got removed from the Arch repos. In case anyone is interested, here is the old official PKGBUILD, which you can use to compile your own stable st (st-git from the AUR obviously uses the latest git version):

pkgname=st
pkgver=0.7
pkgrel=1
pkgdesc='A simple virtual terminal emulator for X.'
arch=('x86_64')
license=('MIT')
depends=('libxft' 'libxext' 'xorg-fonts-misc')
makedepends=('ncurses')
url="http://st.suckless.org"
source=(http://dl.suckless.org/st/$pkgname-$pkgver.tar.gz)
md5sums=('29b2a599cf1511c8062ed8f025c84c63')

prepare() {
  cd "$srcdir"/$pkgname-$pkgver
  # skip terminfo which conflicts with ncurses
  sed -i '/\@tic /d' Makefile
}

build() {
  cd "$srcdir"/$pkgname-$pkgver
  make X11INC=/usr/include/X11 X11LIB=/usr/lib/X11
}

package() {
  cd "$srcdir"/$pkgname-$pkgver
  make PREFIX=/usr DESTDIR="$pkgdir" TERMINFO="$pkgdir/usr/share/terminfo" install
  install -Dm644 LICENSE "$pkgdir/usr/share/licenses/$pkgname/LICENSE"
  install -Dm644 README "$pkgdir/usr/share/doc/$pkgname/README"
}

To use your own config.h:

  • Put your config.h in the root directory, where the PKGBUILD is. (I like to keep mine in ~/.config/st and then symlink to that, so that I can easily version-control it along with all my other dotfiles.)

  • Add config.h to the sources() array.

  • Add 'SKIP' to the md5sums() array (or use updpkgsums).

  • Add this line to the end of the prepare() function:

      cp "$srcdir"/config.h config.h
    

I wrote a more detailed tutorial here for those interested. Happy suckingless.

level 1
Trusted User & Security Team3 points · 9 months ago

/me hides

level 2

I know you deleted these as they are meant to be recompiled with users own configuration. But can you upload the related pkgbuild to aur so one can have a template to build for arch

level 3
Trusted User & Security Team2 points · 9 months ago

Sure, i'll do that. If anyone wants to improve these PKGBUILDs i can also orphan them after doing so.

level 1
Trusted User & Security Team3 points · 9 months ago

st: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/st/
dwm: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/dwm/

If there is anyone that cares about these and want to take over the maintaing, feel free to either mail me or ping me on reddit/IRC

level 2
[deleted]
1 point · 9 months ago

not to pester you, but are more suckless style programs leaving the repo?

dvtm/abduco and dmenu are still in. just curious. (also, was wmii part of this, or did it leave for other reasons?)

level 3
Trusted User & Security Team2 points · 9 months ago

AFAIK, dvtm and abduco are neither suckless projects? They are created by another guy. dmenu doesn't require recompliation, so i don't see any reason why we would drop that.

wmii was dropped by me as well, the PKGBUILD was horrendous and i didn't find any updated git repo for the project, only old tarballs on their new download page. I also have no idea who actually uses the project so i thought it was fit for dropping as well.

level 4
[deleted]
1 point · 9 months ago

neither suckless projects

nope i suppose not, endorsed by though, and same config style. dvtm does work fine with default build config, and abduco works with that setup.

too bad about wmii. i'll poke around the mirrors floating around and maybe upload a aur pkg if one looks steady.

thanks all for the info

level 5
Trusted User & Security Team2 points · 9 months ago
level 1

You should really just build from source and install. You want all those patches?

Should be per-user rather than system-wide. Just follow git upstream. No need for a package here.

level 2
Original Poster2 points · 9 months ago

Like I've stated before, st functions quite well as-is without any patches/modifications. I've been happily using vanilla st for quite some time and have yet to encounter a patch that I would deem useful for my configuration. Having to track/update/rebuild said source is yet another responsibility I'd personally prefer not to deal with and, in my opinion, is one of the reasons for having a package manager in the first place.

While I don't want to get into a full-blown philosophical debate on the matter, I really see no harm in keeping the package in the Arch repo. Surely, I can't be the only one who uses it as-is.

level 3
Trusted User & Security Team1 point · 9 months ago

While I don't want to get into a full-blown philosophical debate on the matter, I really see no harm in keeping the package in the Arch repo. Surely, I can't be the only one who uses it as-is.

Feel free to vote on the AUR package and leave a comment. If there are enough users that feels like this, it shouldn't be a problem to re-add it.

level 4
Original Poster1 point · 9 months ago

Thank you, I'll certainly go ahead and do that. This is my first time really having issues with the availability of a particular Arch package, so the helpful suggestion is greatly appreciated.

level 3

Yea I use it vanilla as well. The only thing i miss some times if i forget to run tmux is back scrolling.

level 1

I moved from st to alacritty (AUR). Not as minimalistic but the same feel - and configuration can be done in a config file instead of recompiling.

Community Details

62.4k

Subscribers

598

Online

For users of the much loved Linux distro, Arch Linux.

Create Post