FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > ArchLinux > ArchLinux User Repository

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 11-28-2009, 02:44 AM
Panos Filip
 
Default Status of the Chromium/Chrome packages on AUR

On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 12:44 AM, Panos Filip <panosfilip@gmail.com> wrote:

> OK, I think we are gonna see new packages coming.
>
> http://build.chromium.org/buildbot/snapshots/chromium-rel-linux-chromeos/
>
> Guess what ...
>

OK, as I knew, we are gonna have new packages again:

1) chromiumos-bin http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=32290
2) chromium-os-bin http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=32118

The first one .... hmm... is a copy of a PKGBUILD I uploaded on
bbs.archlinux.org based on chromium-browser-bin. The user didn't seem to be
interested on uploading the sources (chromium-browser.desktop
chromium-browser.png
chromium-browser.sh
LICENSE.txt) as well, and renamed accordingly.

The second one is more proper, but has to be renamed.

That means: we "need"* the (2) but with the (1)'s name.


*We don't really need the chromium-os chromium interface as standalone
packages, only the standalone browser.
 
Old 11-28-2009, 02:47 AM
Panos Filip
 
Default Status of the Chromium/Chrome packages on AUR

On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 5:44 AM, Panos Filip <panosfilip@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 12:44 AM, Panos Filip <panosfilip@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> OK, I think we are gonna see new packages coming.
>>
>> http://build.chromium.org/buildbot/snapshots/chromium-rel-linux-chromeos/
>>
>> Guess what ...
>>
>
> OK, as I knew, we are gonna have new packages again:
>
> 1) chromiumos-bin http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=32290
> 2) chromium-os-bin http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=32118
>
> The first one .... hmm... is a copy of a PKGBUILD I uploaded on
> bbs.archlinux.org based on chromium-browser-bin. The user didn't seem to
> be interested on uploading the sources (chromium-browser.desktop
> chromium-browser.png
> chromium-browser.sh
> LICENSE.txt) as well, and renamed accordingly.
>
> The second one is more proper, but has to be renamed.
>
> That means: we "need"* the (2) but with the (1)'s name.
>
>
> *We don't really need the chromium-os chromium interface as standalone
> packages, only the standalone browser.
>

And a duplicate of (2)

3) chromium-os-browser-bin http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=32291
 
Old 11-28-2009, 02:57 AM
Ionut Biru
 
Default Status of the Chromium/Chrome packages on AUR

On 11/28/2009 05:47 AM, Panos Filip wrote:

On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 5:44 AM, Panos Filip<panosfilip@gmail.com> wrote:




On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 12:44 AM, Panos Filip<panosfilip@gmail.com>wrote:


OK, I think we are gonna see new packages coming.

http://build.chromium.org/buildbot/snapshots/chromium-rel-linux-chromeos/

Guess what ...



OK, as I knew, we are gonna have new packages again:

1) chromiumos-bin http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=32290
2) chromium-os-bin http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=32118

The first one .... hmm... is a copy of a PKGBUILD I uploaded on
bbs.archlinux.org based on chromium-browser-bin. The user didn't seem to
be interested on uploading the sources (chromium-browser.desktop
chromium-browser.png
chromium-browser.sh
LICENSE.txt) as well, and renamed accordingly.

The second one is more proper, but has to be renamed.

That means: we "need"* the (2) but with the (1)'s name.


*We don't really need the chromium-os chromium interface as standalone
packages, only the standalone browser.



And a duplicate of (2)

3) chromium-os-browser-bin http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=32291


deleted 1) and 3)
 
Old 11-28-2009, 03:21 AM
Panos Filip
 
Default Status of the Chromium/Chrome packages on AUR

On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 5:57 AM, Ionut Biru <ibiru@archlinux.org> wrote:

> On 11/28/2009 05:47 AM, Panos Filip wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 5:44 AM, Panos Filip<panosfilip@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 12:44 AM, Panos Filip<panosfilip@gmail.com
>>> >wrote:
>>>
>>> OK, I think we are gonna see new packages coming.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://build.chromium.org/buildbot/snapshots/chromium-rel-linux-chromeos/
>>>>
>>>> Guess what ...
>>>>
>>>>
>>> OK, as I knew, we are gonna have new packages again:
>>>
>>> 1) chromiumos-bin http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=32290
>>> 2) chromium-os-bin http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=32118
>>>
>>> The first one .... hmm... is a copy of a PKGBUILD I uploaded on
>>> bbs.archlinux.org based on chromium-browser-bin. The user didn't seem to
>>> be interested on uploading the sources (chromium-browser.desktop
>>> chromium-browser.png
>>> chromium-browser.sh
>>> LICENSE.txt) as well, and renamed accordingly.
>>>
>>> The second one is more proper, but has to be renamed.
>>>
>>> That means: we "need"* the (2) but with the (1)'s name.
>>>
>>>
>>> *We don't really need the chromium-os chromium interface as standalone
>>> packages, only the standalone browser.
>>>
>>>
>> And a duplicate of (2)
>>
>> 3) chromium-os-browser-bin http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=32291
>>
>
> deleted 1) and 3)
>

Does chromium-os-bin work for you ? Is it really necessary to keep at least
one on AUR ?
 
Old 11-28-2009, 03:28 AM
Ionut Biru
 
Default Status of the Chromium/Chrome packages on AUR

On 11/28/2009 06:21 AM, Panos Filip wrote:
<snip>

Does chromium-os-bin work for you ? Is it really necessary to keep at least
one on AUR ?


to be fair i didn't had the curiosity to try it and still don't have.
but if you say that is not working then i told see any point to have it.


in my opinion such build doesn't have to be in AUR. better to discuss
this on forum.
 
Old 11-28-2009, 06:03 AM
Ray Rashif
 
Default Status of the Chromium/Chrome packages on AUR

2009/11/28 Ionut Biru <ibiru@archlinux.org>

> On 11/28/2009 06:21 AM, Panos Filip wrote:
> <snip>
>
> Does chromium-os-bin work for you ? Is it really necessary to keep at
>> least
>> one on AUR ?
>>
>
> to be fair i didn't had the curiosity to try it and still don't have. but
> if you say that is not working then i told see any point to have it.
>
> in my opinion such build doesn't have to be in AUR. better to discuss this
> on forum.
>
>
>
The vmdk is already available from a multitude of sites; users can just
download and use it with eg. VBox. I don't see what these packages do other
than just creating another chromium browser with extra functionality when
it's supposed to be an "OS".


--
GPG/PGP ID: B42DDCAD
 
Old 11-28-2009, 06:42 AM
Panos Filip
 
Default Status of the Chromium/Chrome packages on AUR

On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 6:28 AM, Ionut Biru <ibiru@archlinux.org> wrote:

> On 11/28/2009 06:21 AM, Panos Filip wrote:
> <snip>
>
> Does chromium-os-bin work for you ? Is it really necessary to keep at
>> least
>> one on AUR ?
>>
>
> to be fair i didn't had the curiosity to try it and still don't have. but
> if you say that is not working then i told see any point to have it.
>
> in my opinion such build doesn't have to be in AUR. better to discuss this
> on forum.
>
>
>
IMO, we don't need this package. The binary's main purpose on the googlebot
is to demonstrate the Chrome interface on ChromeOS and in order to use when
you build a ChromeOS build (if you read the instructions, there is a step
where the this binary has to be downloaded)

Now, as it is, chromium-os-bin, provides a Chromium build with some more
features like clock, network settings, that apply on ChromeOS. It is not
ChromeOS/ChromiumOS itself
 
Old 12-08-2009, 06:51 PM
Panos Filip
 
Default Status of the Chromium/Chrome packages on AUR

And the story goes on. Google released a beta version of Chrome, and we
already have two new ones

1. google-chrome-beta http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=32530
2. google-chrome http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=32531

Do we need them ?
 
Old 12-08-2009, 06:53 PM
Ionut Biru
 
Default Status of the Chromium/Chrome packages on AUR

On 12/08/2009 09:51 PM, Panos Filip wrote:

And the story goes on. Google released a beta version of Chrome, and we
already have two new ones

1. google-chrome-beta http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=32530
2. google-chrome http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=32531

Do we need them ?


delete 2

google-chrome-beta i think we can have it because google has 3 channels.
stable, beta and dev. but it should follow only the beta as
google-chrome-dev should follow only dev
 
Old 12-08-2009, 07:46 PM
Ranguvar
 
Default Status of the Chromium/Chrome packages on AUR

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 14:53, Ionut Biru <ibiru@archlinux.org> wrote:
> but it should follow only the beta as
> google-chrome-dev should follow only dev

I'm not sure if I'm getting your meaning right, but I think that if a
new beta release arrives,
and it is a version later than the current dev release, -dev should be
updated... same for
- -beta updating to the latest stable if there's not a newer beta.

Users shouldn't have to switch packages to get a newer release if they
use -beta or -dev IMO

-- Ranguvar
[Devin Cofer]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.13 (GNU/Linux)

iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJLHrsLAAoJEHdXKOHe3MUTDTUP/3mqgNaI2/8b8rb4V880gqaK
+29yjuCHIK3zKJERMC9x0ITHPvqn935dUeZTnfhaqNQUOkrKQY fB24x0cBzhgXWF
HtstHrYNDxuWHV0wz+PR4qbTL+5tFw+A3TNavsll2k74PECnTE Q9udxJMM2UXTW1
duaY0QjH0x3vTXxue7Qb1SX/wHoYOYSaf348yh/R65Ds87mZJ4qTCQ0a/EapOYX9
qL/Y248yCNielCIVJaYdetGFp/UCnE5OGHDRnzw8FxLkRM2BJ6eexzSgUzl6N3+0
RYmWktc2T6EP9dY/2DyFba9xcO7q8Ls2Fr6G6MwanFTvdZTvvnpfpYBNg6DXtAO5
vADStedFKdVGnU1gpOzV1NzeaXChwBmR5fDsJP09wsaSrmgs7k gJoFuXSYKkJ4/j
nhbzYFZahMVUz16x4vORIIdRzLOfaI70onaIcGCriJ83XvLdcg l42h3+GsmNjFEy
x9JOIDfhOPW+2k6MLeUDI0lJy32B1tyqqWaml/el7AsYxL/mU80WXeEiIViWvFo1
Wx52aZkfQ9gpS883MWCErbEhqzmd0viXAhg4epJm7oBIBTHmKb HUe+nEYow/hKM7
GM1AtGzg2hmXffx1yY9QB7OGKliGfE/orhJ0WeavYaKtys6vtGNGtTwZlsbiZTIM
zE8Dr6HWpxbLJIRt9Q/P
=zaS2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 08:18 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org