Chromium Browser 34.0.1847.137

Browsers, email, chat, etc.
Message
Author
User avatar
OscarTalks
Posts: 2196
Joined: Mon 06 Feb 2012, 00:58
Location: London, England

Chromium Browser 34.0.1847.137

#1 Post by OscarTalks »

Chromium Browser version 34.0.1847.137

This is a Debian release, re-packaged as .sfs and .pet
Runs (as root) in Wheezy, Precise and Upup Raring
Runs in Slacko 5.6 or 5.7 if you install libgconf2 and libgnome-keyring (.pets below)

Works with Adobe Flash Player 11 or 10 and Java plugins if installed.
Does not have Pepper Flash Player.

Download Chromium from here:-
http://smokey01.com/OscarTalks
(You may need to right-click and save)

Earlier versions discussed in this thread below have now been removed.
Attachments
libgnome-keyring-3.4.1-s14.0.pet
Needed for Chromium in Slacko
(55.67 KiB) Downloaded 9201 times
libgconf2-4.1.5-s14.pet
Official Slackware 14.0 libgconf2 library on its own - needed for Chromium in Slacko
(61.26 KiB) Downloaded 7939 times
Last edited by OscarTalks on Wed 02 Sep 2015, 21:46, edited 19 times in total.
Oscar in England
Image

backi
Posts: 1922
Joined: Sun 27 Feb 2011, 22:00
Location: GERMANY

#2 Post by backi »

Hi oscar !

Thanks !! works fine on Precise 5.6.1 !!

User avatar
OscarTalks
Posts: 2196
Joined: Mon 06 Feb 2012, 00:58
Location: London, England

#3 Post by OscarTalks »

Someone contacted me via PM and was asking about the SUID Sandbox in this Chromium.

It was running without this sandbox. I don't know how important this is in our scenario running Puppy Linux rather than the more vulnerable operating systems. I note that SRWare Iron for Linux doesn't seem to include the sandbox in its releases at all. It does register as an error in console though if the SUID sandbox is not running, but all the Chromiums and derivatives I have tested have some level of chatter and warnings in console but seem to surf all websites without any problems.

Anyway, this package does have the sandbox binary included and I figured out how to activate it, so as per the request I have uploaded the modified version. I did wonder if activating a sandbox would be increasing the load on resources unnecessarily, but after the first run (formation of the config data) the terminal is quieter so I guess it is better this way.

LATER:- I downloaded a fresh one and got version 30.0.1568.0 so I have done all the tweaking I know of and have uploaded that one now. It starts, runs and quits for me with no errors in console at all so looks like the best one so far. If anyone knows how to make improvements feel free to speak up, I am just trying to learn all this stuff.

DOWNLOAD LINKS IN FIRST POST AMENDED
Attachments
chromium30.png
Version number and name
(33.03 KiB) Downloaded 57814 times
Oscar in England
Image

User avatar
gjuhasz
Posts: 422
Joined: Mon 29 Sep 2008, 14:28

SUID sandbox is OK

#4 Post by gjuhasz »

Someone contacted me via PM and was asking about the SUID Sandbox in this Chromium.
Thanks for your kind help, Oscar.
Added to my new secure puppy candidate. Runs well under spot. SUID sandbox is OK. PepperFlash runs sandboxed, too.

Regards,

Gabor

lptpacct
Posts: 4
Joined: Sat 06 Apr 2013, 10:23
Location: Western USA

Sandboxing

#5 Post by lptpacct »

Hi Oscar, Thanks for all your help with the Chromium browser work. It zings!javascript:emoticon(':D') >>> One of the daughters pointed out that the sandbox appears inadequate. I said, "No Way!" She said, "Way", and asked me to post a note and a pic. She also found an article, but couldn't place it right away. I'll post it here as soon as she sends it. Thanks again.
Attachments
Chromium-Sandbox-State.png
(24.63 KiB) Downloaded 57153 times

lptpacct
Posts: 4
Joined: Sat 06 Apr 2013, 10:23
Location: Western USA

Sandboxing

#6 Post by lptpacct »

Hi Oscar, here's the link to an article the daughter found, hope it can help in some way, promised her I'd send it along, Thanks again.
http://www.insanitybit.com/2013/04/29/e ... x-sandbox/

gcmartin

#7 Post by gcmartin »

Installed and running without adding libs to Precise 571 (BarryK's).
Thanks
Attachments
NotAdequatelySandboxed.png
Adequately Sandbox'ed ???
(37.05 KiB) Downloaded 57349 times

User avatar
gjuhasz
Posts: 422
Joined: Mon 29 Sep 2008, 14:28

Adequate sandbox in Puli

#8 Post by gjuhasz »

Sandbox is OK in Puli. See http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=88691

"Yes" in "SUID Sandbox" and "Seccomp-BPF sandbox" lines depend on Chrome compilation.
"Yes" in "PID namespaces" and "Network namespaces" lines depend on Linux kernel compilation.

Special thanks to OscarTalks and pemasu for their kind help.[/url][/list]

giannis4
Posts: 98
Joined: Fri 28 Jun 2013, 13:26

#9 Post by giannis4 »

I have a problem with this new version.When I open 3-4 tabs and then I am trying to close one of them the whole browser closes not only the tab I wanted to close.When I open again chomium it says that the browser didnt closed properly.And it happens all the time.Is this a bug?How can I fix it?
I unistalled it and reinstalled it again but with no progress at all.

User avatar
OscarTalks
Posts: 2196
Joined: Mon 06 Feb 2012, 00:58
Location: London, England

#10 Post by OscarTalks »

Hello giannis4

Thanks for the report and sorry to hear that you are having a problem.

The warning that the browser did not close properly is normal behaviour if the browser crashes. The question is, why is it crashing in the first place? I have been using this browser myself quite a bit now and it seems quite a lot of people have downloaded it and this is the first report of this problem so I don't think it is a systemic bug, but I may be wrong.

When you talk about having 3-4 tabs open it makes me wonder if you are just running out of RAM. How much RAM do you have and do you have any swap space loaded? What Puppy is this by the way?

What you could do is try the Chromium posted in the other thread by Peebee and see if that works better for you.
Oscar in England
Image

giannis4
Posts: 98
Joined: Fri 28 Jun 2013, 13:26

#11 Post by giannis4 »

Thank you for your reply.I am running Puppy Precise 5.7.1.and I have 1GB of RAM on my desktop.I also have 2.5GB of swap memory.I ll try out the Chromium posted on the other thread and if I have problems again I will inform you.Thank you.

gcmartin

#12 Post by gcmartin »

Thanks for this PET

Question
Where/How does Chrome know where his cache is?

Thanks in advance

User avatar
OscarTalks
Posts: 2196
Joined: Mon 06 Feb 2012, 00:58
Location: London, England

#13 Post by OscarTalks »

Hello gcmartin,

Not sure I fully understand the question, but I guess it is all determined by how it is coded. In this case the cache is stored in folders under /root/.cache/chromium

The profile data is stored under /root/.config/chromium and I set this in the wrapper script rather than in the launcher script. I don't know if changing this config location would also change the cache location.
Oscar in England
Image

giannis4
Posts: 98
Joined: Fri 28 Jun 2013, 13:26

#14 Post by giannis4 »

Hello Oscar.I ve tried before the chromium browser in PeeBee's thread with no issues.I dont know why the newer version crashes.But I dont want to confuse you anymore.Since PeeBee's version works fine for me I ll stay with it.
Thank you.

User avatar
James C
Posts: 6618
Joined: Thu 26 Mar 2009, 05:12
Location: Kentucky

#15 Post by James C »

Just wanted to confirm that the Wheezy version works fine in Pemasu's latest release. Thanks.

slenkar
Posts: 228
Joined: Sat 11 Jul 2009, 01:26

#16 Post by slenkar »

Im having that same issue with random crashing after closing a tab,
usually after closing a youtube tab
also using precise 5.7.1

backi
Posts: 1922
Joined: Sun 27 Feb 2011, 22:00
Location: GERMANY

#17 Post by backi »

Experienced the same ......with chromium 30

changed to google-chrome 30 ..... no problems any longer

User avatar
OscarTalks
Posts: 2196
Joined: Mon 06 Feb 2012, 00:58
Location: London, England

#18 Post by OscarTalks »

Thanks for the reports.

The Chromium 30.0.1568.0 is a pre-compiled, raw, off-the-trunk version that I downloaded at a time before Version 30 was out as a stable release. It would be considered pre-beta and so may contain bugs. It has been fine for me whenever I have used it, but sorry to hear that some users have experienced problems. There are so many variables including different hardware and user settings. It is difficult for me to even begin to think of how to resolve such problems, especially if I can't reproduce them.

What I would suggest is that if any one version gives problems, just try a different version. These things get updated frequently and it is good that different forum members put together alternative builds and packages for people to try.

There are some versions posted by peebee in another thread which I believe are repackaged Slackware builds but which work in the latest Ubuntu Pups as well.

In my Yandex Disk ( http://yadi.sk/d/zTshLczR4wHj8 ) you will also find a Version 30.0.1599.101 which is a stable release Debian build repackaged for Puppy which works in Precise as well as Wheezy. It would be interesting to know if the crashing problem happens with this version.

I am currently experimenting with a Version 33.0.1717.0 which I might upload for people to try as well.
Oscar in England
Image

User avatar
peebee
Posts: 4370
Joined: Sun 21 Sep 2008, 12:31
Location: Worcestershire, UK
Contact:

#19 Post by peebee »

OscarTalks wrote:.....which I believe are repackaged Slackware builds but which work in the latest Ubuntu Pups as well.
They are indeed - they seem to work in both spup's and upup's but not dpup's due to old libraries.
OscarTalks wrote:.....you will also find a Version 30.0.1599.101 which is a stable release Debian build repackaged for Puppy which works in Precise as well as Wheezy.
I haven't had crashes with any of the 30.0.1599.101 versions. Your Debian version works on Slacko/LxPup with the addition of libgconf - and is "better" than the Slackware build because it doesn't complain about missing Google API keys - but is a little bit bigger as an sfs.

Choice is great fun!!

Cheers
peebee
ImageLxPup = Puppy + LXDE
Main version used daily: LxPupSc; Assembler of UPups, ScPup & ScPup64, LxPup, LxPupSc & LxPupSc64

User avatar
OscarTalks
Posts: 2196
Joined: Mon 06 Feb 2012, 00:58
Location: London, England

#20 Post by OscarTalks »

Debian have now released Chromium 31.0.1650.57 so I have been experimenting with packaging that and have removed the earlier versions.

Tested briefly and working in Wheezy, Precise and Upup Raring.

Works in Slacko 5.6 if you install libgconf2 and libgnome-keyring (use the search in PPM). With earlier Slackos you may also need to update the nss libs (which are in the Firefox directory).

I have been wondering if there is any advantage to using a wrapper script (eg does the directory /usr/lib/chromium need to be put into LD_LIBRARY_PATH or even PATH?) or if just launching the binary accomplishes everything.

With Wheezy and Upup Raring there is a fixator which is designed to allow users to install a chromium .deb package, but it also activates if you install a .pet (but not if you load an .sfs). This means that if I have my /usr/bin/chromium as a script pointing to my wrapper script, that /usr/bin/chromium gets over-written by a different one pointing directly to the chromium main binary (bypassing my wrapper script). The browser does still work, but without any of the variables from the wrapper script of course. Maybe I will ask Pemasu if it is possible to modify the fixator.

These recent Debian Chromiums are supposedly compiled against glibc version 2.11 so I did wonder if it might be possible to make them work in Lucid, but I tried adding missing libs and ended up with a symbol error. Anyone have any suggestions?

EDIT:- I have made some alterations so hopefully you can now install the .pet without the files getting altered.
Oscar in England
Image

Post Reply