A new build of chromium came down today, no change in behavior. (High
frequency error 11's with blank config, can't even display about:blank )
It must be some kind of dependency conflict but I don't seem to have any
way to diagnose it deeper.
I will be writing these posts daily until
chromium has severe issues with tsocks
because of how it does it's sandboxing, but I honestly don't know how
to get around that.
On a properly setup Gentoo amd64 system, /lib is a link to /lib64, so
the error you get is not a path error, the chromium binary really
cannot (or will not) deal
On Wed, 24 Jun 2015 07:08:01 +0100 Mick wrote:
On Tuesday 23 Jun 2015 11:54:02 Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Tue, 23 Jun 2015 05:26:31 -0500, Dale wrote:
Take from that what you will. Note, the issues are for chromium and
not for Google Chrome, shouldn't make a difference for what you want
:26:31 -0500, Dale wrote:
Take from that what you will. Note, the issues are for chromium
and not for Google Chrome, shouldn't make a difference for what
you want to know though.
Thanks. That was what I was looking for. I guess they did do this
then. This may
On 2017-12-06, Mick <michaelkintz...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I discovered that building Chromium with gcc-6.4.0 is taking an inordinately
> longer time on a laptop with 1st gen i7 and 4G of RAM, e.g.:
>
> Wed Sep 27 17:36:53 2017 >>> www-client/chromium-61.0.3163
OK, I know my laptop is quite old, or at least Intel thinks so, but emerging
chromium is now taking *much* longer than it ever did:
Tue Apr 24 11:55:49 2018 >>> www-client/chromium-66.0.3359.117
merge time: 1 day, 16 minutes and 28 seconds.
I'm currently emerging
gevisz wrote:
>
> You probably will be surprised, but the main reason I am trying to use
> tmpfs for /var/tmp/ is not because I want to make emerging chromium
> faster (I have no hope about that because read somewhere that it will
> make compilation only 10 percent faster) but
On Thursday, 6 December 2018 10:35:19 GMT Peter Humphrey wrote:
> On Wednesday, 5 December 2018 11:11:06 GMT Mick wrote:
> > On Wednesday, 5 December 2018 10:12:10 GMT Peter Humphrey wrote:
> > > The main reason I've ditched chrome and chromium altogether is that they
> >
e this project exists. I thought Chromium was essentially
> un-Googled, but obviously there's more there to take place to strip Google's
> tentacles from the browser.
>
> > Which overlay to get it from?
>
> According to:
>
> https://github.com/Eloston/ungoogled-chromium/blob
On Thursday, 11 June 2020 08:57:45 BST Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Jun 2020 03:19:43 -0400, Walter Dnes wrote:
> > > I don't watch Netflix on my laptop, but I've just tried it in Chromium
> > > and it seems to be working fine. I suspect it's either the widevone or
>
On 2021/09/27 at 07:31pm, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Sep 2021 11:23:58 -0700, Mark Knecht wrote:
> > I couldn't (easily - I'm very busy right now) figure out how to get
> > Chrome and Chromium to sync bookmarks and passwords and I want
> > Windows, Android a
Apparently, though unproven, at 10:49 on Thursday 02 June 2011, András Csányi
did opine thusly:
Hi All,
Something strange happen here. I have seen few things in Linux world
but this is very new for me!
I have this fantastic browser called Chromium (12.0.742.68) and I
really like
On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 11:20:40PM +0100, Mick wrote
I looked at how long some packages are taking these days. I noticed that
firefox and chromium take a lot longer to emerge than was the case 3-4 years
ago. For example:
[...deletia...]
I am wondering if something in my configuration
On Thu, 12 Feb 2015 13:24:55 + Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk wrote:
On Thu, 12 Feb 2015 15:15:50 +0200, Gevisz wrote:
And I would not report it if ._cfg0002_package.use would not suggested
to insert # required by www-client/chromium-40.0.2214.111
# required by chromium
On 10/20/10 04:06:52, Andy Wilkinson wrote:
I believe I know the answer to the question... the real question is,
how can I work around it? ;)
I am running the development branch of www-client/chromium (currently
8.0.552.0). As a result, I like the latest builds to always be
unmasked
when
On 2 June 2011 11:21, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote:
While I wrote this letter Chromium become crazy again - thanks the
automatic save few words has lost this letter - and I know that the
root cause the Chromium itself and the flash isn't matter. Flash just
make faster
Apparently, though unproven, at 14:27 on Thursday 02 June 2011, András Csányi
did opine thusly:
On 2 June 2011 11:21, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote:
While I wrote this letter Chromium become crazy again - thanks the
automatic save few words has lost this letter - and I know
to be firefox
Oh and a test 20 minutes ago showed
KDE4+Chromium = X hangs and chromium can't be killed
XFCE4+Chromium = no problems
It looks like there is a pattern but I could be wrong.
It may look like KDE is the likely culprit based on just the
information you provide, but I would be more
would be the number of lines divided by the number of full-time
developers, and don't forget to put in the middle of that formula how
skilled they are. Having that into account, chromium has a good base
since few teams in the planet will have the quantity and quality of
man power that Google has
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 10:52 AM, Nilesh Govindrajan m...@nileshgr.com wrote:
I tried compiling all versions of chromium (-O3, but it always worked
previously) v8 (tried -O3 -O2 too)
but it always segfaults when I try to open the settings page.
CrRendererMain[6059]: segfault at 5 ip
On Wednesday 23 January 2013 09:29:22 PM IST, Michael Mol wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 10:52 AM, Nilesh Govindrajan m...@nileshgr.com
wrote:
I tried compiling all versions of chromium (-O3, but it always worked
previously) v8 (tried -O3 -O2 too)
but it always segfaults when I try to open
Took me a while because i don't use Chromium on that computer much so i lost
track of the issue.
The problem seems to have been that python was built with /dev/shm mounted with
mode 0755.
updated the mode to 1777 (tmp-style) and recompiled python
chromium now compiles fine.
not sure
I looked at how long some packages are taking these days. I noticed that
firefox and chromium take a lot longer to emerge than was the case 3-4 years
ago. For example:
# genlop -t www-client/firefox
* www-client/firefox
Sat Dec 18 17:19:14 2010 www-client/firefox-3.6.13
merge
On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 6:52 AM, behrouz khosravi bz.khosr...@gmail.com wrote:
well chromium was just an example. I just think that when there is a version
upgrade, a patch should be enough.
For things like backports you're fairly likely to only get a patch.
However, for an upstream version
On Sunday 16 Oct 2016 15:49:51 Alexander Kapshuk wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 1:57 PM, Stephan Lukasczyk
>
> <mailingli...@lukasczyk.me> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I yesterday updated Chromium to 54.0.2840.59 (stable) in my desktop
> > machine and sinc
2018-02-08 23:57 GMT+02:00 Rich Freeman <ri...@gentoo.org>:
> On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 4:52 PM, gevisz <gev...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> However, it probably won't be sooner than
>> # emerge --update --deep --with-bdeps=y --newuse --backtrack=90 --ask
>> wo
On Wednesday, 5 December 2018 03:26:50 GMT Jack wrote:
> On 2018.12.04 20:36, Adam Carter wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 7:41 AM Mick wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, 4 December 2018 19:23:27 GMT Jack wrote:
> > > Phew! The chromium emerge completed with -j1, althou
, you can use
> >> ebuild to finish the install and qmerge steps. That avoids needing
> >> to start the compile from the beginning.
> >
> > You can use ebuild for that too, with the compile option. I've have
> > the chromium build fail for apparently random reasons
he cause of my problem with this package. Right now I'm
> trying separate build environment with decreased job count value and it
> looks promissing. I'll leave the message with results in the reply to
> that message. 13.06.2019, 14:13, "Neil Bothwick" :
You can set that in packag
On Thu, 11 Jun 2020 13:45:53 +0100, Michael wrote:
> > Incidentally, I found an a reliable way of killing Firefox on this
> > laptop, run a chromium build in the background :)
>
> TBH the way Chromium has been bloating it would kill pretty much
> anything alive on a PC
Hi.
Nothing compares to Chromium (browser) in terms of compilation times. On
my system with 12 core threads it takes about 8 hours to compile - which
is 4 times longer than 10 years ago with 2 core threads ;)
Libreoffice takes a few hours, but less than half of chromium. Nothing
gets close
ents"
--redirect "chrome://resources/css/|../../ui/webui/resources/css" --redirect
"chrome://resources/html/|../../ui/webui/resources/html" --redirect
"chrome://resources/js/|../../ui/webui/resources/js" --redirect
"chrome://resources/polymer/v1_0/|../.
On Tue, 29 Jun 2010 16:23:48 +0200, Alex Schuster wrote:
I tried chromium once, about half a year ago, but it crashed instantly.
Emerging it again. But I like Konqueror very much. It has problems with
some web sites, for those I use Firefox. I am missing some of Firefox'
plugins
Hello,
I have nptl and nptlonly set in my make.conf file.
I thought that was the best setting for threading.
Now, I want to install the Chromium web browser.
It is asking me to the set the +threads flag for ffmpeg,
before www-client/chromium can be installed. OK
no problem on a per package
that's written increases the the chances a security
holes will be introduced into the application.
And as an internet browser, they're also susceptible to many more vectors of
attack than most other packages. For chromium specifically, I haven't looked
at the CVEs but I suspect many are for webkit
more secure with it...
The noscript firefox addon gives significant protection with only a
little inconvenience. There was no equivalent for chromium last time I
checked, and it still doesn't have a master password to protect saved
webform passwords. Chromium is faster than a pgo build of firefox
On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 4:31 AM, András Csányi sayusi.a...@gmail.com wrote:
On 2 September 2011 10:17, JD Horelick jdho...@gmail.com wrote:
Also, one is a binary, one is source that you need to compile. And
Chromium is an EXTREMELY long compile
I agree it takes long time (1-2 hours
I tried compiling all versions of chromium (-O3, but it always worked
previously) v8 (tried -O3 -O2 too)
but it always segfaults when I try to open the settings page.
CrRendererMain[6059]: segfault at 5 ip 7f0d0834970c sp
7fff71d91a60 error 4 in libv8.so.3.15.11[7f0d08181000
On Wednesday 23 January 2013 09:22:21 PM IST, Nilesh Govindrajan wrote:
I tried compiling all versions of chromium (-O3, but it always worked
previously) v8 (tried -O3 -O2 too)
but it always segfaults when I try to open the settings page.
CrRendererMain[6059]: segfault at 5 ip
On 30/01/13 at 11:09pm, Nilesh Govindrajan wrote:
Since Gentoo updates libraries very quickly, I'm wondering if it is
safe to use the binary version? Has anyone faced library breakages on
this?
Chromium is easily recompiled with new libraries and you don't have a
broken browser, which won't
On Tue, 29 Jul 2014 14:38:04 +0430, behrouz khosravi wrote:
I was trying to emerge chromium and I noticed that it should download
about 200 Mb, and no wonder cause it is source files, not binary
executable. However I wanted to know that if a new version of chromium
comes out, an update
On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 08:46:10AM -0400, Mike Gilbert wrote
I should warn you against including all of those -mno-xxx flags. This
has been known to break the build process for packages like chromium,
which always wants to build with SSE4 support and toggles it off at
runtime. Passing -mno
On Saturday 27 February 2016 12:51:32 Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Sat, 27 Feb 2016 11:35:02 +, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> > I think I know the answer already, but is there any way to install www-
> > client/chromium without all the bloat? I don't see any need here f
On Saturday 27 February 2016 14:58:25 I wrote:
> On Saturday 27 February 2016 12:51:32 Neil Bothwick wrote:
> > On Sat, 27 Feb 2016 11:35:02 +, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> > > I think I know the answer already, but is there any way to install
> > > www-
> > > c
On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 5:36 PM, Stephan Lukasczyk
<mailingli...@lukasczyk.me> wrote:
> On 2016-10-16 15:14:07, Mick wrote:
>>
>> On Sunday 16 Oct 2016 15:49:51 Alexander Kapshuk wrote:
>>>
>>> I've got flash working with these pkgs:
>>> www-plugin
On 2016-10-16 15:14:07, Mick wrote:
On Sunday 16 Oct 2016 15:49:51 Alexander Kapshuk wrote:
I've got flash working with these pkgs:
www-plugins/adobe-flash-23.0.0.185
www-client/chromium-54.0.2840.59
With no www-plugins/chrome-binary-plugins installed.
I have both www-plugins/chrome-binary
javascript linked to some crap-factory
named criteo.com.
I'm using chromium, but I just checked that the same happens with
Firefox, so the fault lies with
http://libv.livejournal.com and not with Google (for once)
Now, I tried to edit the settings of chromium to block javascript from
criteo.com. Guess
of the page, and is impossible to
> remove. This is caused by some javascript linked to some crap-factory
> named criteo.com.
> I'm using chromium, but I just checked that the same happens with
> Firefox, so the fault lies with
> http://libv.livejournal.com and not with Google (for once
On Thursday, 3 May 2018 18:22:01 BST Mick wrote:
> I will give USE="jumbo-build" a spin later to see what improvement I may
> get.
I rebuilt chromium with USE="jumbo-build" with amazing results:
Fri May 4 12:37:06 2018 >>> www-client/chromium-66.0.33
d Chromium's .desktop file to include the
> `--force-device-scale-factor=1.5` flag. It works fine, but the problem
> is that this file obviously gets overwritten on each update, so I have
> to manually run a sed script after every Chromium update. This is
> rather annoying, and since
On Thursday, 3 May 2018 18:00:45 BST Corbin Bird wrote:
> .
> Chromium switched to 'clang++ v5.x' as its primary compiler.
> Why?
> The Chromium devs are using 'c++' features supported in gcc v8+.
> .
> So ... first compile run is with 'gcc' ... then Chromium is re-comp
of my tmpfs to 12GB so
that the chromium
could be emerged in tmpfs (using the swap) without the need to set notmpfs.conf
for chromium and the likes.
And I am going to set the whole /var/tmp/ on tpmfs instead of just
/var/tmp/portage
Is it ok?
If you're not using ccache, then you don't need /var
On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 4:52 PM, gevisz <gev...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> However, it probably won't be sooner than
> # emerge --update --deep --with-bdeps=y --newuse --backtrack=90 --ask
> world --exclude chromium
> fails because of the "--exclude chromium" part
On 08/02/18 23:57, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 4:52 PM, gevisz <gev...@gmail.com> wrote:
However, it probably won't be sooner than
# emerge --update --deep --with-bdeps=y --newuse --backtrack=90 --ask
world --exclude chromium
fails because of the "--exclude chr
On Monday, 12 March 2018 17:11:16 GMT Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
> No. What these warnings mean is that the chromium build system is
> passing these options to the compiler:
>
>-Wno-enum-compare-switch -Wno-tautological-unsigned-zero-compare
>-Wno-null-pointer-arithmetic -W
of the page
are clickable. All text links are not.
www-client/chromium works without any problem. I use stable ebuilds for
chromium and chrome.
I tested www-client/google-chrome on my laptop with Sabayon Linux installed
and it works. All settings are synchronized between the browsers, so
gt; > > > And today, of course, there's an upgrade. That's another reason I
> > > > ditched it. Is there a way to force chromium to be not ~amd64 on a
> > > > ~amd64 system?
> > >
> > > Yes, I do that with this entry in /etc/portage/package.keywo
On Wednesday, 5 December 2018 11:11:06 GMT Mick wrote:
> On Wednesday, 5 December 2018 10:12:10 GMT Peter Humphrey wrote:
> > The main reason I've ditched chrome and chromium altogether is that they
> > insist on redirecting me to their mobile site - and this is a 27-inch
> >
On 2018.12.04 20:36, Adam Carter wrote:
On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 7:41 AM Mick wrote:
> On Tuesday, 4 December 2018 19:23:27 GMT Jack wrote:
> Phew! The chromium emerge completed with -j1, although it took 4
hours
> longer
> than last time on one PC and 6.5 hours longe
On Thursday, 14 February 2019 12:27:25 GMT Marc Joliet wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, 14. Februar 2019, 13:12:29 CET schrieb Mick:
> > Hi All,
> >
> > I just noticed chromium-72.0.3626.96 is bringing in Java packages as
> > dependencies, I'd rather keep off my systems. This i
Am Donnerstag, 14. Februar 2019, 13:12:29 CET schrieb Mick:
> Hi All,
>
> I just noticed chromium-72.0.3626.96 is bringing in Java packages as
> dependencies, I'd rather keep off my systems. This is caused by the new USE
> flag closure-compile, which I think is advertised
On Sun, 2019-09-15 at 05:45 -0400, John Covici wrote:
> Hi. I want to have Chromium on linux, but I want to build the
> Chrome
> OS version, so I can have their version of the accessibility plugin
> which is called Chrom next. I did not see any use flags, so how can
> I
>
On 12 June 2020 19:09:21 CEST, Peter Humphrey wrote:
>On Friday, 12 June 2020 16:17:52 BST Neil Bothwick wrote:
>
>> I run testing on this laptop so updates were more frequent, although
>I
>> now use Chromium from stable to reduce that.
>
>I run testing on this w
>
> > I run testing on this laptop so updates were more frequent, although I
> > now use Chromium from stable to reduce that.
>
> Ahh! Yes, running Chromium ~amd64 must introduce a whole new world of
> pain! :-)
>
> Have you also tried 'echo bfq > /sys/block/
, Ofcourse we now have libgit2.so.1.1
Who in god's name requires a specific minor version of a package!?!?!?!
Pure madness!!!
My much bigger problem is:
atg@tortoise ~ $ chromium
chromium-browser: error while loading shared libraries: libre2.so.8:
cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory
it masked manually, it would seem.
Also, you are trying to emerge a masked ebuild of chromium:
# Stephan Hartmann (2021-03-21)
# Dev channel releases are only for people who
# are developers or want more experimental features
# and accept a more unstable release.
>=www-client/chro
rsion installed: 2.33
> Size of files: 16,676 KiB
> Homepage: https://www.gnu.org/software/libc/
> Description: GNU libc C library
> License: LGPL-2.1+ BSD HPND ISC inner-net rc PCRE
> #
>
>
> It is possible
Chromium now cannot render web pages. It's throwing signal 6 abort
errors all over the place.
When I try to update it it spews all of this nonsense to the console:
!!! All ebuilds that could satisfy " (2017-05-21)
# (and others, updated later)
# These old versions of toolchain pac
On Mon, 11 Sep 2023 21:19:27 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> chromium has been building since 10:14, it's now 21:16 and still going
> so 9 hours at least on this machine to build a browser - almost as bad
> as openoffice at it's worst (regularly took 12 hours). Nodejs also took
> a
rd shortcuts/mouse gestures. So, I decided to try
> chromium (-bin, for now), in the hope that it would be more
> user-respectful.
> Until now, no improvement. (Note that I symlinked
> ~/.config/chromium-bin to ~/.config/google-chrome, otherwise I would
> lose all bookmarks. May
I've mostly been living on my *cough* windows gaming machine because
chromium STILL spams "Error 11" in all tabs. A 30 second test dumped
bout 415 crash dumps to the log folder. =\
Has ANYONE gotten a handle on this error yet? Any idea what package
causes it? Chromium seems
11 segfault, no further messages.
##
Document about:blank loaded successfully
Document http://youtube.com/ loaded successfully
Segmentation fault
atg@tortoise ~ $
##
4. Chromium segfaults on ALL WEBPAGES, The window comes up with all tabs
but all of them
mesa uses llvm (at runtime) to generate
GPU object code. Based on the work-around, it looks like compiled GPU
object code is cached by Chrome/Chromium, and updates to mesa and/or
llvm can result attempts to use old, incompatible GPU object code.
As pages are rendered, there was a constant strea
On 15/06/2014 00:20, Mick wrote:
I looked at how long some packages are taking these days. I noticed that
firefox and chromium take a lot longer to emerge than was the case 3-4 years
ago. For example:
# genlop -t www-client/firefox
* www-client/firefox
Sat Dec 18 17:19:14 2010
On Thursday 12 February 2015 09:02:33 Alec Ten Harmsel wrote:
I think (emphasis on the think) that qtwebkit needs libxml2 with -icu,
and chromium needs libxml2 with +icu. As far as I can tell from
reading a couple bug reports, it looks like you can rebuild qtwebkit
with -gstreamer (since
gt;>
>> Do I correctly understood
>> https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Portage_TMPDIR_on_tmpfs
>> that I can safely set in the fstab the size of my tmpfs to 12GB so
>> that the chromium could be emerged in tmpfs (using the swap)
>> without the need to set notmpfs.conf for chromi
Chromium is not released. It is not beta, it's not even really alpha yet.
It's common with software like this to disable everything by default and
force the user to enable things.
Reason: the user is probably running them to test them
On Dec 19, 2009 4:30 PM, Xi Shen davidshe...@googlemail.com
On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 20:10:34 +0800, Xi Shen wrote:
thanks. i figured out have to start 2 chromium window :)
Yes, but that's not how it should work, or how it worked until
recently.
the way 'alt+f2' start a new application is not quite intuitive.
There is nothing intuitive about computer use
On 17 August 2010 19:49, Andy Wilkinson drukar...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks for the info. That doesn't entirely answer my question, though...
shouldn't chromium's bundled ffmpeg have h264 support? Google's
youtube.com/html5 page suggests that Chrome (and thus chromium?) supports
h264
I've been running without swap for quite a while, but my system goes
into a near freeze whenever I undertake a large emerge such as
chromium or openoffice. Is there anything I can do to prevent this
besides turning swap back on? I have 3GB RAM and MAKEOPTS=-j1.
- Grant
The near freeze
On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 10:48 PM, Peter Humphrey
pe...@humphrey.ukfsn.org wrote:
Hello list,
Sorry to bother you with another OT question.
I've been trying the /chromium/ browser and I've come to like it - except
for one thing: I can't see how to force pages to be shown in sans-serif
down the scope of the problem. So,
try adblock and flashblock. The extra ram they will suck probably
worths the trouble.
There's no need for an extension to get that behaviour with Chromium.
You can simply enable click to play on the about:flags page, then
choose click to play for plugins
András Csányi wrote:
I had a similar problem but regarding Chromium. You can read about in
this list Chromium and everything subject. May I ask which kernel do
you use?
I remember the thread, even replied a couple times, but this is even
worse and happens when flash is not even
On 02/14/2012 03:41 PM, Grant wrote:
Has anyone found a GUI alternative to firefox they like that's in
portage? Something minimal preferably but with flash support?
I've used Chromium in the past. It supports the same plugins that
Firefox does. There is also Epiphany, the GNOME browser
Hi all,
I used to run Gentoo Unstable (~amd64) but reinstalled just about
everything to go back to Stable (amd64).
For Chromium, the Google Talk plugin, and Skype I'm running the latest
(unstable) versions again (www-client/chromium-23.0.1271.40,
www-plugins/google-talkplugin-3.9.1.0, and net-im
and data volumes are no longer such an issue.
On 29/07/14 12:08, behrouz khosravi wrote:
hello everyone.
I was trying to emerge chromium and I noticed that it should download
about 200 Mb, and no wonder cause it is source files, not binary executable.
However I wanted to know that if a new version
: www-client/chromium -nls -linguas*
linguas_en linguas_pl
So far I am afraid to recompile everything with global -nls USE flag and
LINGUAS=en in /etc/portage/make.conf. So, trying to cut the cat's tail
by parts. :)
Set your desired LINGUAS in make.conf and when you recompile a package
On Thu, 12 Feb 2015 09:02:33 -0500 Alec Ten Harmsel a...@alectenharmsel.com
wrote:
On 02/12/2015 08:15 AM, Gevisz wrote:
# emerge --ask chromium
...
The following USE changes are necessary to proceed:
(see package.use in the portage(5) man page for more details)
# required by www
On Tue, 5 May 2015 13:05:55 +0100, Mick wrote:
During a backup of a home directory I noticed loads of Chromium and
Firefox crash/recovery files being copied over. However, I don't know
if this is a btrfs problem, or the fact that I had to forcefully shut
down KDE once or twice recently
On Sun, 17 May 2015 22:54:19 +0100, Mick wrote:
Chromium now selects the whole URL when you click in the address bar.
I'm not sure when it started doing this but it was quite recently.
This is not a problem at all, because this address bar
auto-highlighting in Chromium does not take
-this-onto-your-computer-3173880.html
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=786909
https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/TEMP-0786909-A21526
https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=491435
Take from that what you will. Note, the issues are for chromium
2015-08-02 1:29 GMT+03:00 Mick michaelkintz...@gmail.com:
PS. I noticed that Firebug (developer tools for FF), as well as Developer
Tools in Chromium, suddenly start uploading data to some https server, when I
visit certain websites. For example some sites on weebly.com would cause
On 11/11/2015 12:58 PM, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Nov 2015 11:38:27 -0700, the...@sys-concept.com wrote:
>
>> Is "www-client/chromium" good alternative to firefox?
>
> I much prefer it, but that's all it is, personal preference. Try it and
> decide for
On Sun, 10 Jan 2016 19:26:19 +
Mick <michaelkintz...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sunday 10 Jan 2016 18:39:43 Ian Bloss wrote:
> > You can install pepperflash to chromium although it's proprietary.
> > Google Chrome has pepper flash by default
>
> For Chromium you ca
On Sat, 27 Feb 2016 11:35:02 +, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> I think I know the answer already, but is there any way to install www-
> client/chromium without all the bloat? I don't see any need here for
> any of these:
>
> app-accessibility/speech-dispatcher
>
On Sun, Jun 4, 2017 at 7:45 PM, Rasmus Thomsen
<rasmus.thom...@protonmail.com> wrote:
> So chromium does detect flash, that's something ;)
>
> Please go to advanced settings → content settings and allow flash for all
> sites ( just to test it - don't use this conf
It doesn't work for me either with chromium.
It seems to be some kind of supported video format negotiation error
with javascript or something; or CORS or who knows. For some reason a
suitable encoding can't be found and it fails with a log message in
debugging console as well.
However if going
So chromium does detect flash, that's something ;)
Please go to advanced settings → content settings and allow flash for all sites
( just to test it - don't use this config as daily driver
Original Message
On 4 Jun 2017, 18:41, Alexander Kapshuk wrote:
On Sun, Jun 4, 2017 at 6
On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 1:33 AM, Daniel Frey <djqf...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 06/04/2017 03:54 PM, Jorge Almeida wrote:
>> Well, a plugin to make a browser barely usable. But what about a
>> functionality allegedly built in?
>>
>>
> Even stranger, chromium
On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 10:37:53 -0700, Ian Zimmerman wrote:
> Is this an officially approved technique?? it is DIRTY.
If the change doesn't affect the installed code, it is encouraged to
avoid unnecessary rebuilding.
For example, a new version of LibreOffice or Chromium depends on lib
201 - 300 of 1334 matches
Mail list logo