Skip to content

ngrep: update to 1.49.0, adopt#61336

Open
r0man1an wants to merge 1 commit into
void-linux:masterfrom
r0man1an:ngrep
Open

ngrep: update to 1.49.0, adopt#61336
r0man1an wants to merge 1 commit into
void-linux:masterfrom
r0man1an:ngrep

Conversation

@r0man1an

@r0man1an r0man1an commented Jul 2, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Testing the changes

  • I tested the changes in this PR: YES

Local build testing

  • I built this PR locally for my native architecture, x86_64-glibc
  • I built this PR locally for these architectures (if supported. mark crossbuilds):
    • aarch64-musl, -glibc
    • armv7l
    • x86_64-musl

@r0man1an

r0man1an commented Jul 2, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

I noticed that there is already an existing PR for this but it's been idle for 3 weeks and was flagged as AI, so I'm submitting a proper one. While that PR does switch to PCRE2 it only adds cross-compilation flags for libpcap and completely forgot pcre2. This version adds proper cross-compilation for both, includes --disable-pcap-restart to prevent rnutime crashes on newer libpcap (used by Arch, Alpine etc. This PR also updates the 'update' file to the new distfile pattern.

Comment thread srcpkgs/ngrep/update Outdated
site="https://github.com/jpr5/ngrep/releases"
pattern="V\K[\d\_]*(?=\.tar\.gz)"
site="https://api.github.com/repos/jpr5/ngrep/releases/latest"
pattern="tag_name.*v\K[\d\.]+"

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Can you check whether that update file is even required?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Not necessarily but it was already there so I updated it alongside the template. Its not a must-have but its nice to have.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why is nice to have if the default just works?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I looked at the GitHub releases again. The default update check should handles this fine since it's a straightforward GitHub release with a clean version tag, so the watch file is redundant. I'll remove it tomorrow when I'm home

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants