Heiko Baums schrieb:
Am Sat, 21 Nov 2009 17:35:04 +0200
schrieb nez...@allurelinux.org:
That's not a problem. Source redistribution is allowed so we can host
the sources wherever we want.
I'm interested in a built-from-source native x86_64 iron package. The
"build" directory in the iron source
Am Sat, 21 Nov 2009 17:35:04 +0200
schrieb nez...@allurelinux.org:
> That's not a problem. Source redistribution is allowed so we can host
> the sources wherever we want.
>
> I'm interested in a built-from-source native x86_64 iron package. The
> "build" directory in the iron sources is empty tho
On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 03:18:38PM +0100, Heiko Baums wrote:
> Am Sat, 21 Nov 2009 14:23:52 +0100
> schrieb :
>
> > wouldn't it be two PKGBUILDs, for chromium and iron?
>
> I would prefer Iron over Chromium, because it hasn't the Google spyware
> included. Problem with Iron is that the source cod
Am Sat, 21 Nov 2009 14:23:52 +0100
schrieb :
> wouldn't it be two PKGBUILDs, for chromium and iron?
I would prefer Iron over Chromium, because it hasn't the Google spyware
included. Problem with Iron is that the source code is only hosted in a
splitted 7-Zip package on Rapidshare.
Heiko
you can have a look at the AUR package chromium-browser-bin,I use it
as my daily-use browser...
On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 9:12 PM, Andreas Radke wrote:
> Am Wed, 18 Nov 2009 16:25:13 +0200
> schrieb Ionut Biru :
>
>> now is not the time. chromium doesn't have a stable release yet and
>> the build p
On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 14:12:26 +0100
Andreas Radke wrote:
> Am Wed, 18 Nov 2009 16:25:13 +0200
> schrieb Ionut Biru :
>
> > now is not the time. chromium doesn't have a stable release yet and
> > the build process kinda suck. 10gb space for compiling chromium is
> > something that cannot be forgot
Am Wed, 18 Nov 2009 16:25:13 +0200
schrieb Ionut Biru :
> now is not the time. chromium doesn't have a stable release yet and
> the build process kinda suck. 10gb space for compiling chromium is
> something that cannot be forgot :)
>
Only 10gb? That's a bad reason. Otherwise we wouldn't have any
On Thu, 19 Nov 2009, Ionut Biru wrote:
> On 11/19/2009 07:00 AM, Christopher Daley wrote:
> >Is there any chance of the -bin (precompiled) versions being hosted once an
> >official release is made? I guess there's little reason for it as they're
> >so easy to "compile" yourself, but it would simp
On 11/19/2009 07:00 AM, Christopher Daley wrote:
Is there any chance of the -bin (precompiled) versions being hosted once an
official release is made? I guess there's little reason for it as they're
so easy to "compile" yourself, but it would simplify upgrading/maintenance
for a number of users.
Is there any chance of the -bin (precompiled) versions being hosted once an
official release is made? I guess there's little reason for it as they're
so easy to "compile" yourself, but it would simplify upgrading/maintenance
for a number of users.
I don't see google moving away from their custom b
hollun...@gmx.at wrote:
On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 12:42:40 -0200
"Guilherme M. Nogueira" wrote:
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 12:25 PM, Ionut Biru
wrote:
now is not the time. chromium doesn't have a stable release yet and
the build process kinda suck. 10gb space for compiling chromium is
someth
On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 12:42:40 -0200
"Guilherme M. Nogueira" wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 12:25 PM, Ionut Biru
> wrote:
>
> > now is not the time. chromium doesn't have a stable release yet and
> > the build process kinda suck. 10gb space for compiling chromium is
> > something that cannot be
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 12:25 PM, Ionut Biru wrote:
> now is not the time. chromium doesn't have a stable release yet and the
> build process kinda suck. 10gb space for compiling chromium is something
> that cannot be forgot :)
>
> --
> Ionut
>
WOW! Really?!
I had no idea compiling chromium need
On 11/18/2009 03:48 PM, Hamo wrote:
Dear Archlinux users,
Chrome is likely to be a daily-use web browser and with the Chrome OS
releasing,it will become more and more reliable.Archlinux is a
rolling-release distribution and it aims at being bleeding edge.So we
should have a maintained-by-TU chrom
Hello
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 09:48:26PM +0800, Hamo wrote:
> Dear Archlinux users,
> Chrome is likely to be a daily-use web browser and with the Chrome OS
> releasing,it will become more and more reliable.Archlinux is a
> rolling-release distribution and it aims at being bleeding edge.So we
> sho
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 11:05 AM, Juan Diego wrote:
> I would be happy to maintain that package, but unfortunately Im not a TU
>
> dont you think archlinux should have something similar to ppa from
> ubuntu so that it will be easier to maintain and promote personal
> repositories, aur is a good op
I would be happy to maintain that package, but unfortunately Im not a TU
dont you think archlinux should have something similar to ppa from
ubuntu so that it will be easier to maintain and promote personal
repositories, aur is a good option but if I would have to choose
between using a packages fr
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 08:48, Hamo wrote:
> Dear Archlinux users,
> Chrome is likely to be a daily-use web browser and with the Chrome OS
> releasing,it will become more and more reliable.Archlinux is a
> rolling-release distribution and it aims at being bleeding edge.So we
> should have a mainta
Dear Archlinux users,
Chrome is likely to be a daily-use web browser and with the Chrome OS
releasing,it will become more and more reliable.Archlinux is a
rolling-release distribution and it aims at being bleeding edge.So we
should have a maintained-by-TU chrome/chromium and it is really
useful...
19 matches
Mail list logo
