Update PKGBUILD

[l3afyb0y]

Summary

I noticed the PKGBUILD seemed out of date with the current version, causing me to hit issues when updating. Figured it might save some trouble to just PR the updated file.

I also noticed that there seems to be plans to automate uploading to AUR that has yet to be done. In the meantime, if you want anyone to maintain a package on AUR until you've setup your automation I would be happy to help out with that, and add an account as a co-maintainer to allow upstream to eventually setup automation. As an Arch user, AUR packages are super convenient, plus I maintain a couple packages already so I'm familiar with it as well. Feel free to reach out if you want!

Changes

• Changed version to 0.6.0 to match CLI

Summary by CodeRabbit

Chores

• Package version updated to 0.6.0.

[vercel]

@l3afyb0y is attempting to deploy a commit to the gnarusg's projects Team on Vercel.

A member of the Team first needs to authorize it.

[coderabbitai]

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: cbde7f94-bf38-4c85-9630-3e15b5cacb34

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between c7c1369 and 75df5cb.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• PKGBUILD

---

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

Version update to PKGBUILD incrementing package version from 0.5.9 to 0.6.0. This change affects the installation path resolution and version substitution within the DKMS configuration file during package building.

Changes

Cohort / File(s)	Summary
Package Version PKGBUILD	Updated pkgver variable from 0.5.9 to 0.6.0, affecting DKMS source directory paths and version substitution in dkms.conf.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~2 minutes

Poem

🐰 A little hop, a version bump,
From five-point-nine to six we jump!
The PKGBUILD now runs clean and bright,
A simpler change, but oh so right! ✨

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 2 | ❌ 1

❌ Failed checks (1 inconclusive)

Check name	Status	Explanation	Resolution
Title check	❓ Inconclusive	The title is generic and vague, using 'Update PKGBUILD' which doesn't specify what aspect of the file was changed or why.	Use a more specific title like 'Bump PKGBUILD version to 0.6.0' to clearly indicate the primary change in this pull request.

✅ Passed checks (2 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.

_{✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.}

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

Updates the Arch Linux AUR PKGBUILD metadata to reflect the current CLI version, aligning the DKMS install path and substituted version fields with the intended release.

Changes:

• Bumps pkgver from 0.5.9 to 0.6.0.

---

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

[Copilot]

pkgver is being updated, but the source still pulls directly from the Git repo without being pinned to a tag/commit. That means the built contents can drift from the declared pkgver, making the package non-reproducible and potentially causing DKMS module version/path mismatches. Consider pinning source to #tag=v${pkgver} (or using a release tarball URL), or alternatively convert this into a -git package with a pkgver() function derived from git describe and an appropriate pkgname.

[Gnarus-G]

@l3afyb0y What was the issue you encountered?

[l3afyb0y]

@l3afyb0y What was the issue you encountered?

When pkgver is the same as the installed version, pacman will typically skip building/updating files to match the changes, and tends to use a cached build for re-installations. So while I technically had no errors, the installed files didn't get replaced until after pkgver got bumped.
I also was having issue because I originally installed via curl command, and pacman doesn't like to overwrite files not claimed by a package, so bumping pkgver, building a .pkg.tar.zst, and using --overwrite was necessary for me to upgrade.
Maybe, in retrospect, it was just a me issue? But I'm pretty sure the version number was one half of the problem for me. Either way, bumping it fixed it in the end.

[Gnarus-G]

So what you already had version 5.9 installed and so it wouldn't update? And it should have updated because there was actually code in the main branch that you needed that wasn't captured your previous installation of 5.9?

[l3afyb0y]

So what you already had version 5.9 installed and so it wouldn't update? And it should have updated because there was actually code in the main branch that you needed that wasn't captured your previous installation of 5.9?

when you install from a PKGBUILD on Arch, using an AUR helper, or makepkg directly, pacman builds the latest version and subsequently caches the built .pkg.tar.zst and relies on the pkgver to alert that the code has changed. If the pkgver is identical to the currently installed programs version number (in this case, v0.5.9), then pacman skips rebuilding the package (even, from my understanding, when makepkg is used) and "upgrades" (reinstalls) using the previously cached .pkg.tar.zst and assumes that the code is unchanged. At no point does pacman do any sort of check on the diff between current install and the codebase being used to upgrade. Updates are explicitly triggered by a change in pkgver.

I believe it's stated in the man page PACMAN(5): https://man.archlinux.org/man/PKGBUILD.5