Added workflow for AUR, DEB, and RPM packages

[SimplyCEO]

Changed a bunch of directory structure, may need to tweak things.

[SimplyCEO]

It is not ready for merge yet.

AUR build is complete.
DEB build is half complete, it looks different from the one provided by the repository.
RPM is broken.

There are inconsistencies related to file structure. Do I need to keep /opt for both Shell and PNG files or use the hicolor directory? It differs from RPM to the others.

[psygreg]

The confusion seems to stem from the fact each package is installed in different places on each distro. That happens because of the RPM package being more restrictive about where to put files.

• DEB version: places linuxtoys.sh and linuxtoys.png in /opt/linuxtoys
• RPM version: places linuxtoys.sh in /usr/bin and linuxtoys.png in the hicolor directory
• Arch version: places both in /usr/bin.

linuxtoys.desktop is placed always in /usr/share/applications.

That's a bit of an unfortunate inheritance from the early versions - from when I wasn't that familiar with packaging - that we will have to live with.

[SimplyCEO]

Is the packages folder really needed? After this workflow they may generate automatically.

[psygreg]

Not really, you may delete it with the PR if you want.

[psygreg]

I have been adding quite a bit of stuff, but nothing related to package building or the main linuxtoys.sh module so I think I shouldn't be getting on your way much. The only change I did was adding a line to linuxtoys.spec to get it to build on COPR.

[SimplyCEO]

No problem. I have been busy for some days, but I will keep the work.

[SimplyCEO]

I have tested and it works. There is a problem though.

linuxtoys/src/buildfiles/rpm/rpmbuild/SPECS/linuxtoys.spec

Line 11 in ad4e961

BuildRequires: desktop-file-utils

This section only works if it is commented out, even having desktop-file-utils installed. Do you have any idea on how to manipulate this bug?

[psygreg]

Never seen that problem before. Does it build the package correctly without that line?
What if you leave BuildRequires empty?

[SimplyCEO]

Does it build the package correctly without that line?

It does, strangely.

[SimplyCEO]

There are packages available at https://github.com/SimplyCEO/linuxtoys/actions/runs/15656299420 action, where I was testing the best way to improve the workflow. Please check if they suit your needs.

[psygreg]

Looks almost perfect, just gotta sync to current version just for safety I think. Also, would it be possible for it to make SRPMS too? If it isn't I can build those manually, but would be nice if it could. On terminal, it can be achieved by sending the -ba flag instead of -bb to rpmbuild if that helps