[arch-general] We need a maintained-by-TU chrome/chromium...
Dear Archlinux users, Chrome is likely to be a daily-use web browser and with the Chrome OS releasing,it will become more and more reliable.Archlinux is a rolling-release distribution and it aims at being bleeding edge.So we should have a maintained-by-TU chrome/chromium and it is really useful... -- Nick Name:Hamo Website:http://hamobai.com/
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 08:48, Hamo <hamo.by@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Archlinux users, Chrome is likely to be a daily-use web browser and with the Chrome OS releasing,it will become more and more reliable.Archlinux is a rolling-release distribution and it aims at being bleeding edge.So we should have a maintained-by-TU chrome/chromium and it is really useful...
If you're interested, I recommend finding a sponsor so that you can apply... There are lots of software projects that would be good to have, but it only makes sense to keep them in the repos if someone is interested in maintaining them.
I would be happy to maintain that package, but unfortunately Im not a TU dont you think archlinux should have something similar to ppa from ubuntu so that it will be easier to maintain and promote personal repositories, aur is a good option but if I would have to choose between using a packages from aur or using a package from a personal repository from somebody I wouldnt think it twice, I would choose the personal repo one. On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 10:54 PM, Daenyth Blank <daenyth+arch@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 08:48, Hamo <hamo.by@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Archlinux users, Chrome is likely to be a daily-use web browser and with the Chrome OS releasing,it will become more and more reliable.Archlinux is a rolling-release distribution and it aims at being bleeding edge.So we should have a maintained-by-TU chrome/chromium and it is really useful...
If you're interested, I recommend finding a sponsor so that you can apply...
There are lots of software projects that would be good to have, but it only makes sense to keep them in the repos if someone is interested in maintaining them.
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 11:05 AM, Juan Diego <juantascon@gmail.com> wrote:
I would be happy to maintain that package, but unfortunately Im not a TU
dont you think archlinux should have something similar to ppa from ubuntu so that it will be easier to maintain and promote personal repositories, aur is a good option but if I would have to choose between using a packages from aur or using a package from a personal repository from somebody I wouldnt think it twice, I would choose the personal repo one.
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 10:54 PM, Daenyth Blank <daenyth+arch@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 08:48, Hamo <hamo.by@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Archlinux users, Chrome is likely to be a daily-use web browser and with the Chrome OS releasing,it will become more and more reliable.Archlinux is a rolling-release distribution and it aims at being bleeding edge.So we should have a maintained-by-TU chrome/chromium and it is really useful...
If you're interested, I recommend finding a sponsor so that you can apply...
There are lots of software projects that would be good to have, but it only makes sense to keep them in the repos if someone is interested in maintaining them.
2 things. 1) You will chose the personal repo, but is not trusted, is under your risk, with AUR you have the option to see the source of the pkg!, that's why AUR ;), in the past trusted users had their own repos, then [community] was created. IMHO, there are repos with chromium packages, if you want the binary version of them instead the AUR PKGBUILD, then add those repos under your own risk ;). 2) No top-posting thanks. -- Angel Velásquez angvp @ irc.freenode.net Arch Linux Trusted User Linux Counter: #359909 http://www.angvp.com
Hello On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 09:48:26PM +0800, Hamo wrote:
Dear Archlinux users, Chrome is likely to be a daily-use web browser and with the Chrome OS releasing,it will become more and more reliable.Archlinux is a rolling-release distribution and it aims at being bleeding edge.So we should have a maintained-by-TU chrome/chromium and it is really useful... Just out of interest, is it really so useful? Though it's version 4 or 5 it makes a quite unready impression. Also the speed (not directly the browsing speed) is relative. Every browser gets lame when you have 30+ tabs opened. Same for chrome. Sure, it's a question of diversity. And it has 500 votes in AUR. --
On 11/18/2009 03:48 PM, Hamo wrote:
Dear Archlinux users, Chrome is likely to be a daily-use web browser and with the Chrome OS releasing,it will become more and more reliable.Archlinux is a rolling-release distribution and it aims at being bleeding edge.So we should have a maintained-by-TU chrome/chromium and it is really useful...
now is not the time. chromium doesn't have a stable release yet and the build process kinda suck. 10gb space for compiling chromium is something that cannot be forgot :) -- Ionut
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 12:25 PM, Ionut Biru <biru.ionut@gmail.com> wrote:
now is not the time. chromium doesn't have a stable release yet and the build process kinda suck. 10gb space for compiling chromium is something that cannot be forgot :)
-- Ionut
WOW! Really?! I had no idea compiling chromium needed that much space. -- Guilherme M. Nogueira "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." - Arthur C. Clarke
On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 12:42:40 -0200 "Guilherme M. Nogueira" <guilherme@nirev.org> wrote:
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 12:25 PM, Ionut Biru <biru.ionut@gmail.com> wrote:
now is not the time. chromium doesn't have a stable release yet and the build process kinda suck. 10gb space for compiling chromium is something that cannot be forgot :)
-- Ionut
WOW! Really?! I had no idea compiling chromium needed that much space.
One reason why I like Arch: It's easy to stay close to upstream, to work with them, and to kick butt if necessary. Regards, Philipp
hollunder@gmx.at wrote:
On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 12:42:40 -0200 "Guilherme M. Nogueira" <guilherme@nirev.org> wrote:
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 12:25 PM, Ionut Biru <biru.ionut@gmail.com> wrote:
now is not the time. chromium doesn't have a stable release yet and the build process kinda suck. 10gb space for compiling chromium is something that cannot be forgot :)
-- Ionut
WOW! Really?! I had no idea compiling chromium needed that much space.
One reason why I like Arch: It's easy to stay close to upstream, to work with them, and to kick butt if necessary.
Regards, Philipp
I agree that we should have a TU-maintained build of chrome/chromium, but as Ionut pointed out the current build process is a little ridiculous. Once it has stabilized and matured a little bit more I will be happy to maintain it. My wife uses it religiously so I have a good incentive to keep it clean and current. :P
Is there any chance of the -bin (precompiled) versions being hosted once an official release is made? I guess there's little reason for it as they're so easy to "compile" yourself, but it would simplify upgrading/maintenance for a number of users. I don't see google moving away from their custom build utilities any time soon, so unless someone forks chromium we're probably not going to get that a simplified build process. On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 6:01 PM, Daniel J Griffiths <ghost1227@archlinux.us>wrote:
hollunder@gmx.at wrote:
On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 12:42:40 -0200 "Guilherme M. Nogueira" <guilherme@nirev.org> wrote:
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 12:25 PM, Ionut Biru <biru.ionut@gmail.com> wrote:
now is not the time. chromium doesn't have a stable release yet and the build process kinda suck. 10gb space for compiling chromium is something that cannot be forgot :)
-- Ionut
WOW! Really?! I had no idea compiling chromium needed that much space.
One reason why I like Arch: It's easy to stay close to upstream, to work with them, and to kick butt if necessary.
Regards, Philipp
I agree that we should have a TU-maintained build of chrome/chromium, but as Ionut pointed out the current build process is a little ridiculous. Once it has stabilized and matured a little bit more I will be happy to maintain it. My wife uses it religiously so I have a good incentive to keep it clean and current. :P
On 11/19/2009 07:00 AM, Christopher Daley wrote:
Is there any chance of the -bin (precompiled) versions being hosted once an official release is made? I guess there's little reason for it as they're so easy to "compile" yourself, but it would simplify upgrading/maintenance for a number of users. I don't see google moving away from their custom build utilities any time soon, so unless someone forks chromium we're probably not going to get that a simplified build process.
after they release a stable version we can manage to do a proper package for our users, but until then use chromium-browser-bin or chromium-browser-svn. -- Ionut
On Thu, 19 Nov 2009, Ionut Biru wrote:
On 11/19/2009 07:00 AM, Christopher Daley wrote:
Is there any chance of the -bin (precompiled) versions being hosted once an official release is made? I guess there's little reason for it as they're so easy to "compile" yourself, but it would simplify upgrading/maintenance for a number of users. I don't see google moving away from their custom build utilities any time soon, so unless someone forks chromium we're probably not going to get that a simplified build process.
after they release a stable version we can manage to do a proper package for our users, but until then use chromium-browser-bin or chromium-browser-svn.
-- Ionut
I like Iron browser :) -- Best, Jozsef Kurucity | Web & Graphic Designer +971 50 6783113 | jozefk@gmx.com
Am Wed, 18 Nov 2009 16:25:13 +0200 schrieb Ionut Biru <biru.ionut@gmail.com>:
now is not the time. chromium doesn't have a stable release yet and the build process kinda suck. 10gb space for compiling chromium is something that cannot be forgot :)
Only 10gb? That's a bad reason. Otherwise we wouldn't have any source compiled OOo packages ;) Whenever the google browser has become usable drop me a line and send a PKGBUILD that works well - I will have a look. With usable I mean a native compiling without lib32 stuff, usable plugins (at least flash, java, javascript-blocker and adblocker). -Andy
On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 14:12:26 +0100 Andreas Radke <a.radke@arcor.de> wrote:
Am Wed, 18 Nov 2009 16:25:13 +0200 schrieb Ionut Biru <biru.ionut@gmail.com>:
now is not the time. chromium doesn't have a stable release yet and the build process kinda suck. 10gb space for compiling chromium is something that cannot be forgot :)
Only 10gb? That's a bad reason. Otherwise we wouldn't have any source compiled OOo packages ;)
Whenever the google browser has become usable drop me a line and send a PKGBUILD that works well - I will have a look. With usable I mean a native compiling without lib32 stuff, usable plugins (at least flash, java, javascript-blocker and adblocker).
-Andy
wouldn't it be two PKGBUILDs, for chromium and iron?
Am Sat, 21 Nov 2009 14:23:52 +0100 schrieb <hollunder@gmx.at>:
wouldn't it be two PKGBUILDs, for chromium and iron?
I would prefer Iron over Chromium, because it hasn't the Google spyware included. Problem with Iron is that the source code is only hosted in a splitted 7-Zip package on Rapidshare. Heiko
Am Sat, 21 Nov 2009 14:23:52 +0100 schrieb <hollunder@gmx.at>:
wouldn't it be two PKGBUILDs, for chromium and iron?
I would prefer Iron over Chromium, because it hasn't the Google spyware included. Problem with Iron is that the source code is only hosted in a splitted 7-Zip package on Rapidshare.
Heiko That's not a problem. Source redistribution is allowed so we can host
On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 03:18:38PM +0100, Heiko Baums wrote: the sources wherever we want. I'm interested in a built-from-source native x86_64 iron package. The "build" directory in the iron sources is empty though. I didn't dig deep enough yet trying to build iron. If anyone have done this before , please tell me how. I'm willing to maintain this in AUR If needed.
Am Sat, 21 Nov 2009 17:35:04 +0200 schrieb Nezmer@allurelinux.org:
That's not a problem. Source redistribution is allowed so we can host the sources wherever we want.
I'm interested in a built-from-source native x86_64 iron package. The "build" directory in the iron sources is empty though.
I didn't dig deep enough yet trying to build iron. If anyone have done this before , please tell me how. I'm willing to maintain this in AUR If needed.
I tried it but had the problem that makepkg told me, that it hadn't had the rights to run ./configure. It's probably one of the 7-Zip problems because 7-Zip doesn't store file attributes. In accordance with the README file it should simply be done by the usual ./configure make make install Heiko
Heiko Baums schrieb:
Am Sat, 21 Nov 2009 17:35:04 +0200 schrieb Nezmer@allurelinux.org:
That's not a problem. Source redistribution is allowed so we can host the sources wherever we want.
I'm interested in a built-from-source native x86_64 iron package. The "build" directory in the iron sources is empty though.
I didn't dig deep enough yet trying to build iron. If anyone have done this before , please tell me how. I'm willing to maintain this in AUR If needed.
I tried it but had the problem that makepkg told me, that it hadn't had the rights to run ./configure. It's probably one of the 7-Zip problems because 7-Zip doesn't store file attributes.
In accordance with the README file it should simply be done by the usual ./configure make make install
Heiko
you can try . ./configure make make install or chmod u+x configure make make install Stefan
Am Sat, 21 Nov 2009 17:35:04 +0200 schrieb Nezmer@allurelinux.org:
That's not a problem. Source redistribution is allowed so we can host the sources wherever we want.
I'm interested in a built-from-source native x86_64 iron package. The "build" directory in the iron sources is empty though.
I didn't dig deep enough yet trying to build iron. If anyone have done this before , please tell me how. I'm willing to maintain this in AUR If needed.
I tried it but had the problem that makepkg told me, that it hadn't had the rights to run ./configure. It's probably one of the 7-Zip problems because 7-Zip doesn't store file attributes.
In accordance with the README file it should simply be done by the usual ./configure make make install
Heiko "chmod +x configure" will get you started. But It will fail soon after
On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 08:21:03PM +0100, Heiko Baums wrote: that.
On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 22:14:55 +0200 Nezmer@allurelinux.org wrote:
Am Sat, 21 Nov 2009 17:35:04 +0200 schrieb Nezmer@allurelinux.org:
That's not a problem. Source redistribution is allowed so we can host the sources wherever we want.
I'm interested in a built-from-source native x86_64 iron package. The "build" directory in the iron sources is empty though.
I didn't dig deep enough yet trying to build iron. If anyone have done this before , please tell me how. I'm willing to maintain this in AUR If needed.
I tried it but had the problem that makepkg told me, that it hadn't had the rights to run ./configure. It's probably one of the 7-Zip problems because 7-Zip doesn't store file attributes.
In accordance with the README file it should simply be done by the usual ./configure make make install
Heiko "chmod +x configure" will get you started. But It will fail soon after
On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 08:21:03PM +0100, Heiko Baums wrote: that.
The beauty of arch is that you can work close to upstream, so just talk to them, file a bug, kick ass, and things will improve. Everyone will gain from it.
you can have a look at the AUR package chromium-browser-bin,I use it as my daily-use browser... On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 9:12 PM, Andreas Radke <a.radke@arcor.de> wrote:
Am Wed, 18 Nov 2009 16:25:13 +0200 schrieb Ionut Biru <biru.ionut@gmail.com>:
now is not the time. chromium doesn't have a stable release yet and the build process kinda suck. 10gb space for compiling chromium is something that cannot be forgot :)
Only 10gb? That's a bad reason. Otherwise we wouldn't have any source compiled OOo packages ;)
Whenever the google browser has become usable drop me a line and send a PKGBUILD that works well - I will have a look. With usable I mean a native compiling without lib32 stuff, usable plugins (at least flash, java, javascript-blocker and adblocker).
-Andy
-- Name:白杨 Nick Name:Hamo Website:http://hamobai.com/
participants (15)
-
Andreas Radke
-
Angel Velásquez
-
Christopher Daley
-
Daenyth Blank
-
Daniel J Griffiths
-
Guilherme M. Nogueira
-
Hamo
-
Heiko Baums
-
hollunder＠gmx.at
-
Ionut Biru
-
Jozsef
-
Juan Diego
-
Nezmer＠allurelinux.org
-
Stefan Husmann
-
vlad