The blogs.msdn.com problem appears to be a bug introduced into WebKit and then merged into Chromium. I have reported the bug to WebKit, see https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=23734
I happen to use the latest build from the buildbot for testing. To do this I installed curl and 7z which are both free and wrote this script: @echo off c: cd \chromium\latest del chromium.zip curl -o chromium.zip http://build.chromium.org/buildbot/continuous/LATEST/chrome-win32.zip 7z x -y chromium.zip I then have a Scheduled Task run this script every morning at 8 AM. I also have it run about a minute after I login. This is a good idea for me because I want to always try out the bugs you are reporting with the latest build. I also work on Chromium everyday so I need to pay a lot of attention to it. I don't think this is a good idea for you unless you want to spend a lot of time working and thinking about Chromium. First of all, I would not want to depend on a third party source for these builds. It would be just too easy to depend on a binary which is compromised. Second, if something goes wrong you are unlikely to notice that you have not been receiving updates and you could potentially be running a version of Chromium with a known security hole. Third, the only quality checks performed by the buildbot are the automated tests. When Anthony and I pick a build for the dev channel we look at the recent changes and are aware of important fixes that are pending. We try to give you the best bang for your buck. We create a release candidate and run it overnight through a series of tests which are much more involved than the buildbot tests. Finally, we make sure the installers all work. The build you see is no older than a few days. Although it contains everything a nightly build would contain, it is hand picked and will be better than a random build. If you are on the dev channel you will also tend to get just the very small binary diff from the last release rather than the 20M+ full install of a nightly build. The most important thing you get from the dev channel is the automatic updates. When there is a security issue we try very hard to get a tested fix in place and then pushed out. If you are on a nightly Chromium build you will not receive these updates. By using a random build from the buildbot you are gaining between 3-6 days of changes but potentially losing a lot more. Please subscribe to the dev channel. For more information read http://dev.chromium.org/getting-involved/dev-channel Jon On Feb 4, 7:58 am, Nat <[email protected]> wrote: > Even the latest version (build 9136) still has a problem > withhttp://blogs.msdn.comwhere the content is blank... > > On Feb 4, 10:16 pm, PJC <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Thanks Erek, > > > I think it'd be good if that URL was publicised better - I wasn't > > aware of it at all. > > > I'm now running build 9029, which not only resolves the 2.0.159 > > problems, it also seems to work correctly with Live Mail (!) > > > -PJC > > > On Feb 1, 6:13 pm, Erek Speed <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > It's a good point that more people testing is probably better. > > > > On the other hand, there's probably some annoying overhead in pushing > > > a release to the auto updater. Given that there's been at least 30 > > > updates to trunk since the build 8857 that Mohamed mentioned, it makes > > > sense for them to make them available to dev channel at a specific > > > interval. > > > > For those don't know the public has access to the latest builds here: > > > >http://build.chromium.org/buildbot/snapshots/chromium-rel-xp/ > > > > It's not as convenient as the auto updating when a new build is > > > released on dev channel but it allows you faster access at least. > > > > On Feb 1, 5:57 am, PJC <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Erek, > > > > > in the very first reply to this topic, Mohamed stated: > > > > > "Hi Evan, This has been fixed in the latest build. Chromium > > > > 2.0.160.0 > > > > (Developer Build 8857)" > > > > > My comments are in light of that statement. Yes, I understand the Dev > > > > build(s) are there for bug-finding, etc, but when bugs in that build > > > > *have been found and fixed*, wouldn't it make sense to release that > > > > later build, or at least allow those of us who are running the Dev > > > > build a mechanism to easily obtain such a later build so that rather > > > > than using a different browser (my solution), we are continuing to > > > > test Chrome and therefore finding any NEW bugs that may be present. > > > > > As it is, I (for one) am not finding any new issues, nor testing > > > > Chrome *at all* at the moment simply because the only released Dev > > > > build is unusable on a large number of sites. > > > > > Surely, if a large number of testers is what is wanted in order to > > > > find bugs, then it makes sense to provide an accelerated build to > > > > those very testers when a major bug is discovered ***and fixed***. > > > > That's my point. > > > > > -PJC --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Chromium Discussion mailing list: [email protected] View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe: http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-discuss -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
