Puppy Linux Discussion Forum Forum Index Puppy Linux Discussion Forum
Puppy HOME page : puppylinux.com
"THE" alternative forum : puppylinux.info
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

The time now is Sat 18 Nov 2017, 01:10
All times are UTC - 4
 Forum index » Advanced Topics » Additional Software (PETs, n' stuff) » Browsers and Internet
Chromium 62-version builds---what is up with them?
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic
Page 1 of 1 [13 Posts]  
Author Message
belham2

Joined: 15 Aug 2016
Posts: 1282

PostPosted: Thu 19 Oct 2017, 07:03    Post subject:  Chromium 62-version builds---what is up with them?  

Hi all,

Anyone have any problems running the newer Chrome/Chromium 62-version builds in any pups? Gawd dam# things won't even start in my most stable pup builds---unlike the 61-and-below builds. It runs in the Ddogs but not the pups.

Mike (that's Mr. Walsh with a capital "W" Wink ), you seeing anything? Is Google screwing with us again......man, this is frustrating. Evil or Very Mad Crying or Very sad
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
musher0


Joined: 04 Jan 2009
Posts: 11133
Location: Gatineau (Qc), Canada

PostPosted: Thu 19 Oct 2017, 14:47    Post subject:  

Hi belham2.

Lots of mumble & grumble about it, here

ETP put it in his Xenial64 Pup variant and people are not happy...

BFN.

_________________
musher0
~~~~~~~~~~
"Logical entities must not be multiplied beyond necessity." | |
« Il ne faut pas multiplier les entités logiques sans nécessité. » (Ockham)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
perdido


Joined: 09 Dec 2013
Posts: 682
Location: Altair IV , Just north of Eeyore Junction.

PostPosted: Thu 19 Oct 2017, 15:38    Post subject: Re: Chromium 62-version builds---what is up with them?  

belham2 wrote:
Is Google screwing with us again......man, this is frustrating. Evil or Very Mad Crying or Very sad


Do yourself a favor and dump your google products. Wink

.

_________________
.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Mike Walsh


Joined: 28 Jun 2014
Posts: 3131
Location: King's Lynn, UK.

PostPosted: Thu 19 Oct 2017, 15:50    Post subject: Re: Chromium 62-version builds---what is up with them?  

perdido wrote:
belham2 wrote:
Is Google screwing with us again......man, this is frustrating. Evil or Very Mad Crying or Very sad


Do yourself a favor and dump your google products. Wink

.


Puh-leeze, don't suggest FF & co. I dumped Mozilla years ago due to continuous multiple crashing.....on an almost daily basis.

Trouble is, with the exception of Edge (I don't count IE as a browser; more as an experiment in how to effectively waste CPU cycles), every browser on the market is based pretty much on either FireFox or Chromium.

Just as I've made the final 32-bit Linux Chrome (48.0.2564.116) my default in the 32-bit Pups, I'm seriously considering 'standardising' on Chrome 60 for 64-bit.....and calling it a day.

(There again, I've said that before, y'know?)

@belham2:- As for 62; all I'm gonna say is 'I'm working on it...'

I'm not surprised.....at all. The 'running-as-root' option was always there for developers to test stuff out. Since 59/60, Google have now added a special 'developer mode' to Chrome; I suspect this dropping of the 'run-as-root' option has been on the cards for several months.

Nanny Google has decided, in her wisdom, that the safest Linux model is the standard 'just a user' setup used by the vast majority of Linux distros. This is one scenario where Pup comes unstuck; where multi-user becomes the defacto across-the-board standard in the Linux world. In that scenario, Pup's a complete non-starter.....

Majority rule, mate. But it explains why the Dogs have no problem with it. They're based on Debian.....which has always been 'multi-user'.


Mike. Wink

_________________
If I've helped you.....please say 'Thanks'!
MY PUPPY PACKAGES
--------------------------------------

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
perdido


Joined: 09 Dec 2013
Posts: 682
Location: Altair IV , Just north of Eeyore Junction.

PostPosted: Fri 20 Oct 2017, 11:54    Post subject: Re: Chromium 62-version builds---what is up with them?  

Mike Walsh wrote:
perdido wrote:
belham2 wrote:
Is Google screwing with us again......man, this is frustrating. Evil or Very Mad Crying or Very sad


Do yourself a favor and dump your google products. Wink

.


Puh-leeze, don't suggest FF & co. I dumped Mozilla years ago due to continuous multiple crashing.....on an almost daily basis.

Trouble is, with the exception of Edge (I don't count IE as a browser; more as an experiment in how to effectively waste CPU cycles), every browser on the market is based pretty much on either FireFox or Chromium.

Just as I've made the final 32-bit Linux Chrome (48.0.2564.116) my default in the 32-bit Pups, I'm seriously considering 'standardising' on Chrome 60 for 64-bit.....and calling it a day.

(There again, I've said that before, y'know?)

@belham2:- As for 62; all I'm gonna say is 'I'm working on it...'

I'm not surprised.....at all. The 'running-as-root' option was always there for developers to test stuff out. Since 59/60, Google have now added a special 'developer mode' to Chrome; I suspect this dropping of the 'run-as-root' option has been on the cards for several months.

Nanny Google has decided, in her wisdom, that the safest Linux model is the standard 'just a user' setup used by the vast majority of Linux distros. This is one scenario where Pup comes unstuck; where multi-user becomes the defacto across-the-board standard in the Linux world. In that scenario, Pup's a complete non-starter.....

Majority rule, mate. But it explains why the Dogs have no problem with it. They're based on Debian.....which has always been 'multi-user'.


Mike. Wink


Hi Mike,

Hope you find a way around the latest google hurdle for those that wish to use that browser.

I poked belham simply because he is a big advocate of everything google. Wink

Maybe the google teddy bear will have an answer to this browser dilemna? (Berenstein LOL)

.

_________________
.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Mike Walsh


Joined: 28 Jun 2014
Posts: 3131
Location: King's Lynn, UK.

PostPosted: Fri 20 Oct 2017, 14:21    Post subject:  

Hiya, perdido.

There's 'fixes' in the works as I speak... Very Happy

Nah, I know I'm a long-term Chrome user, but I've never exactly been what you'd call 'wedded' to the Google eco-system. Much of the office stuff I keep permanently de-activated, and my preferred search engine these days is Duckduckgo.

Chrome (and Google) do have their good points.....but they're just one small part of the overall experience.

But I know what ya mean about, umm.....certain individuals. Bless 'em! Laughing

Quote:
Maybe the google teddy bear will have an answer to this browser dilemna? (Berenstein LOL)


Yep; that sure looks like Google all over..!!


Mike. Wink

_________________
If I've helped you.....please say 'Thanks'!
MY PUPPY PACKAGES
--------------------------------------

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
belham2

Joined: 15 Aug 2016
Posts: 1282

PostPosted: Fri 20 Oct 2017, 14:29    Post subject: Re: Chromium 62-version builds---what is up with them?  

perdido wrote:
Mike Walsh wrote:
perdido wrote:
belham2 wrote:
Is Google screwing with us again......man, this is frustrating. Evil or Very Mad Crying or Very sad


Do yourself a favor and dump your google products. Wink

.


Puh-leeze, don't suggest FF & co. I dumped Mozilla years ago due to continuous multiple crashing.....on an almost daily basis.

Trouble is, with the exception of Edge (I don't count IE as a browser; more as an experiment in how to effectively waste CPU cycles), every browser on the market is based pretty much on either FireFox or Chromium.

Just as I've made the final 32-bit Linux Chrome (48.0.2564.116) my default in the 32-bit Pups, I'm seriously considering 'standardising' on Chrome 60 for 64-bit.....and calling it a day.

(There again, I've said that before, y'know?)

@belham2:- As for 62; all I'm gonna say is 'I'm working on it...'

I'm not surprised.....at all. The 'running-as-root' option was always there for developers to test stuff out. Since 59/60, Google have now added a special 'developer mode' to Chrome; I suspect this dropping of the 'run-as-root' option has been on the cards for several months.

Nanny Google has decided, in her wisdom, that the safest Linux model is the standard 'just a user' setup used by the vast majority of Linux distros. This is one scenario where Pup comes unstuck; where multi-user becomes the defacto across-the-board standard in the Linux world. In that scenario, Pup's a complete non-starter.....

Majority rule, mate. But it explains why the Dogs have no problem with it. They're based on Debian.....which has always been 'multi-user'.


Mike. Wink


Hi Mike,

Hope you find a way around the latest google hurdle for those that wish to use that browser.

I poked belham simply because he is a big advocate of everything google. Wink

Maybe the google teddy bear will have an answer to this browser dilemna? (Berenstein LOL)

.



LOL, so says the man with the Trump-like skill to take a molehill and make it a mountain....on a totally different planet. Do they build border walls too on that planet? Wink
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
belham2

Joined: 15 Aug 2016
Posts: 1282

PostPosted: Fri 20 Oct 2017, 14:34    Post subject:  

Mike Walsh wrote:
Hiya, perdido.

There's 'fixes' in the works as I speak... Very Happy

Nah, I know I'm a long-term Chrome user, but I've never exactly been what you'd call 'wedded' to the Google eco-system. Much of the office stuff I keep permanently de-activated, and my preferred search engine these days is Duckduckgo.

Chrome (and Google) do have their good points.....but they're just one small part of the overall experience.

But I know what ya mean about, umm.....certain individuals. Bless 'em! Laughing

Quote:
Maybe the google teddy bear will have an answer to this browser dilemna? (Berenstein LOL)


Yep; that sure looks like Google all over..!!


Mike. Wink



MIke,

Don't let ole' Perdido fool ya......he's just one of our (Republican, in the States) wild-hair boar unpredictables who delves in an alt reality we keep trying to pull them back from. Laughing We won the White House & Congress, keep trying to tell 'em that, but now we just don't know what to do with these lovingly-addled attack dogs. To be sure, mate, I hold Google in about the same esteem I hold Boris & Theresa (and any other before them), if ya know what I mean Wink
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
musher0


Joined: 04 Jan 2009
Posts: 11133
Location: Gatineau (Qc), Canada

PostPosted: Fri 20 Oct 2017, 17:01    Post subject:  

belham2?

I'm an aging, hippie-like, long-haired, clean-shaven, bohemian, CanadiEn
NDP'er (aka for you Americans: way more to the left than your lefties!!!),
and I totally agree with perdido!

"Dump all your Google products!", is what I say too. Laughing

Way to go, perdido! Wink

BFN.

_________________
musher0
~~~~~~~~~~
"Logical entities must not be multiplied beyond necessity." | |
« Il ne faut pas multiplier les entités logiques sans nécessité. » (Ockham)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
perdido


Joined: 09 Dec 2013
Posts: 682
Location: Altair IV , Just north of Eeyore Junction.

PostPosted: Fri 20 Oct 2017, 22:13    Post subject:  

belham2 wrote:

MIke,

Don't let ole' Perdido fool ya......he's just one of our (Republican, in the States) wild-hair boar unpredictables who delves in an alt reality we keep trying to pull them back from. Laughing We won the White House & Congress, keep trying to tell 'em that, but now we just don't know what to do with these lovingly-addled attack dogs. To be sure, mate, I hold Google in about the same esteem I hold Boris & Theresa (and any other before them), if ya know what I mean Wink


Boris and Natasha! <g>
Theresa is not a Russian spy (at least not yet), maybe she will be outed after Mueller gets done, the way he is going!

.

_________________
.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
perdido


Joined: 09 Dec 2013
Posts: 682
Location: Altair IV , Just north of Eeyore Junction.

PostPosted: Fri 20 Oct 2017, 22:14    Post subject:  

musher0 wrote:
belham2?

I'm an aging, hippie-like, long-haired, clean-shaven, bohemian, CanadiEn
NDP'er (aka for you Americans: way more to the left than your lefties!!!),
and I totally agree with perdido!

"Dump all your Google products!", is what I say too. Laughing

Way to go, perdido! Wink

BFN.


Yowzer! We must be eating from the same bowl! LOL

.

_________________
.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
8Geee


Joined: 12 May 2008
Posts: 1252
Location: N.E. USA

PostPosted: Sat 21 Oct 2017, 00:33    Post subject:  

Well, I have to say that I don't in general like any new browser. This monetizing craze has just gotten out of hand. MHO is that were being treated like drug-addicts and the pusher is thinning the mix at a greater cost. I mean really... this update addiction is out of control. /MHO

Regards
8Geee

_________________
Linux user #498913
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
dancytron

Joined: 18 Jul 2012
Posts: 934

PostPosted: Sat 21 Oct 2017, 02:47    Post subject: Re: Chromium 62-version builds---what is up with them?  

Mike Walsh wrote:

/stuff snipped
Majority rule, mate. But it explains why the Dogs have no problem with it. They're based on Debian.....which has always been 'multi-user'.


Mike. Wink


FWIW, the "--no-sandbox" switch still seems to work in Debian Dog.

Code:
#!/bin/sh

/usr/bin/google-chrome-stable --user-data-dir=/root/chrome/user --disk-cache-dir="/root/chrome/cache" --disk-cache-size=10000000 --media-cache-size=10000000 --no-sandbox --disable-infobars "$@"


The other way is to run it as a regular user from root.

Code:
#!/bin/sh

xhost +local:puppy

su puppy -c "/usr/bin/google-chrome-stable --user-data-dir=/home/puppy/chrome/user --disk-cache-dir=/home/puppy/chrome/cache --disk-cache-size=10000000 --media-cache-size=10000000 "$@""

#old way
#gksu -u puppy "/usr/bin/google-chrome-stable --user-data-dir=/home/puppy/chrome/user --disk-cache-dir=/home/puppy/chrome/cache --disk-cache-size=10000000 --media-cache-size=10000000"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Display posts from previous:   Sort by:   
Page 1 of 1 [13 Posts]  
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic
 Forum index » Advanced Topics » Additional Software (PETs, n' stuff) » Browsers and Internet
Jump to:  

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
[ Time: 0.1396s ][ Queries: 12 (0.0073s) ][ GZIP on ]