@eyedeekay
&kytv
&zzz
+R4SAS
+RN
+RN_
+T3s|4
+dr|z3d
+hk
+orignal
+postman
+wodencafe
Arch
DeltaOreo
FreeRider
FreefallHeavens
Irc2PGuest19353
Irc2PGuest46029
Irc2PGuest64530
Irc2PGuest77854
Nausicaa
Onn4l7h
Onn4|7h
Over1
Sisyphus
Sleepy
Soni
T3s|4_
Teeed
aargh3
acetone_
anon4
b3t4f4c3
bak83_
boonst
cancername
cumlord
dr4wd3_
eyedeekay_bnc
hagen_
khb
mittwerk
not_bob_afk
plap
poriori_
profetikla
rapidash
shiver_
solidx66
u5657_1
uop23ip
w8rabbit
weko_
x74a6
anonymousmaybe
i2p repo down
anonymousmaybe
The following signatures were invalid: EXPKEYSIG 67ECE5605BCF1346 I2P Debian Package Repository <killyourtv@i2pmail.org>
anonymousmaybe
Reading package lists... Done
anonymousmaybe
W: GPG error: deb.i2p2.de bookworm InRelease: The following signatures were invalid: EXPKEYSIG 67ECE5605BCF1346 I2P Debian Package Repository <killyourtv@i2pmail.org>
anonymousmaybe
E: The repository 'https://deb.i2p2.de bookworm InRelease' is not signed.
anonymousmaybe
cc zzz eyedeekay
anonymousmaybe
---
anonymousmaybe
i think its a good a suggestion to stop the i2p repo for gnu/linux systems and start using flatpak instead or even flatpak/snap
anonymousmaybe
this is compatible with all distros, no repo down headache
zzz
rats we shouldn't have let that expire
zzz
fell off my todo list
zzz
I'll fix it but now it will take manual work
anonymousmaybe
np, big cry for the repo users
zzz
its happened before, and I had a reminder in my phone but I didn't get to it. It's a pain.
zzz
I put a note on the repo homepage
anonymousmaybe
considered using flatpak instead of this pain?
zzz
no
T3s|4
anonymousmaybe: not sure which path you're attempting to travel here, especially without clear 'pain avoidance' justification
dr|z3d
lol
anonymousmaybe
T3s|4 if you upload your package to flathub, you wont maintain flathub servers
anonymousmaybe
there is no i2p repository that user need to fix manually
anonymousmaybe
if something need to updated then i2p push it to flathub then user update and get these updates with regular flatpak update
T3s|4
anonymousmaybe: thanks, and ^perhaps a helpful explanation to flathub / flatpak users. Not a user of either (straight up Arch testing repo / java user), so no way to test
dr|z3d
anonymousmaybe: it's all very well suggesting alternative distribution methods, but they take time and effort and research to implement. are you volunteering to put a flatpak recipe together?
dr|z3d
something along the lines of "i've done the work, here's a script to run that'll build you a flatpak installer and also upload to a repo of your choosing". if you've got something like that ready to go, your suggestions would be a lot more persuasive :)
eyedeekay
Actually jpackage will do like 97% of it
eyedeekay
Not that I'm saying we should, just that the thing that does what you said is like, a shell script that calls jpackage
dr|z3d
I was trying to nudge anonymousmaybe to do more than sit on the sidelines, eyedeekay :)
zzz
waiting for the new key to get to our website then I'll put instructions on the repo
zzz
and no I didn't fix the dpkg warnings either
eyedeekay
Thanks zzz
zzz
you'll need to import the key while ssh'ed in before the release
zzz
I also hit another snag I need eche's help for
anonymousmaybe
dr|z3d i can do it but need upstream adoption, will not do it for the sake of fancy of it
dr|z3d
put something together that we can use, ideally with ant integration so it's just another build target, it'll get used, either through an official release, or by users that pull the source and build for themselves.
dr|z3d
either way, your efforts wouldn't be wasted time.
eyedeekay
anonymousmaybe, it's just one of those million things I've figured out how to do at some point or another and shelved because more important things happened. I have hints if you want but it's basically make flatpak config file, generate jpackage, copy jpackage into flatpack, package.
eyedeekay
Pretty much the same process as easy-install, just /nsis/flatpak/
anonymousmaybe
issue is if a package pushed which build build by nonofficial user, it will take crazy time/effort to switch it to the original developers
anonymousmaybe
eyedeekay you have remote server for pushing i2p flatpak which can be used as the official packaging?
anonymousmaybe
i see i2pd here flathub.org/apps/website.i2pd.i2pd
eyedeekay
But there's a mirror on my github
anonymousmaybe
yeah but pushing it to the flathub while its not from the original devs, then switch it to the original devs = bad
anonymousmaybe
you want to use your own flatpak repo not flathub?
eyedeekay
I honestly don't care, just wanted to see if I could
anonymousmaybe
yeah possible
eyedeekay
I know
eyedeekay
Don't use this it's a mess, but it's a working flatpak repo
anonymousmaybe
is i2p compatible wit xdg style?
anonymousmaybe
with*
anonymousmaybe
this project for example stuck, unless they switch to xdg it wont be resolved with flatpak
eyedeekay
It can be, you just have to configure the base dir and config dir at jpackage invocarion time to correspond to the xdg dirs
zzz
anonymousmaybe, please test the instructions posted at deb.i2p2.de
zzz
or anybody else?