New package: msitools-0.103

[elbeardmorez]

Testing the changes

• I tested the changes in this PR: YES

New package

• This new package conforms to the package requirements: YES

Local build testing

• I built this PR locally for my native architecture, (x86_64-glibc)

[elbeardmorez]

with a few tweaks to the template the aarch64 package is successfully built here locally

is there a requirement to get the package building for every single supported architecture?

[Bnyro]

with a few tweaks to the template the aarch64 package is successfully built here locally

is there a requirement to get the package building for every single supported architecture?

No, but all officially supported architectures by the project itself should likely be functional here too.

[github-actions[bot]]

Pull Requests become stale 90 days after last activity and are closed 14 days after that. If this pull request is still relevant bump it or assign it.

[elbeardmorez]

There is no official list of what it should compile on and trying to compile such a list of potential architectures just in case someone needs it one day doesn't appeal as an exercise. If, assuming this goes in, someone then comes and suggests a tweak to make it also compile on XYZ then cool, I'll push the change.

[afranchuk]

I made #49528 as an update to #43321 (which was never merged) and didn't realize this existed. Comparing against your additions, I see that you have build_options="gir" and don't have python3-setuptools.

I found that I needed python3-setuptools otherwise distutils (removed in python 3.12) was missing, and it's used by gobject-introspection. Obviously gobject-introspection should have this dependency itself (EDIT: it appears it does??), but I'm wondering whether the build_options="gir" somehow avoided this issue for you? Or maybe my (previously completely clean) build env somehow got busted?

[github-actions[bot]]

Pull Requests become stale 90 days after last activity and are closed 14 days after that. If this pull request is still relevant bump it or assign it.

[elbeardmorez]

bump!!

@afranchuk did you ever attempt any cross compilation?

I'm not able to comment authoritatively on the gobject-introspection line of questioning, but if I recall correctly, having hit a build failure due to that requirement itself, hunting led me to the likes of https://voidlinux.org/news/2019/02/cross-gobject.html and with the requirement to test cross-compilation (where possible), and having made comparisons with other package's build config / template files, the build_options="gir" addition was the winner.

Given that that post gives me the getting this sh1t working on the myriad platforms packages are available for in the voidlinux arena is difficult so this is how we do it going forward vibe.. I do not want to dig at this at all.

@Bnyro are there any further steps that you are expecting here? @afranchuk has tried twice to get this in, myself just the once, it's not a very complex package so it would be good to understand how we can make this happen.

[afranchuk]

I did not try any cross-compilation. But I agree, it'd be nice to know why this package stagnates.