Hello,
That's really funny. 😀
On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 12:01 PM, Michael Meskes wrote:
> Hi,
>
> could anyone please enlighten me why we have a chromium version in stable
> security that is newer than what we have in unstable? The same version I
> did
> find, though, in experimental. However, I wo
On Fr, 18 Feb 2011, Daniel Leidert wrote:
> > [Added Associations]
> > x-scheme-handler/http=iceweasel.desktop;
> > x-scheme-handler/https=iceweasel.desktop;
>
> into $HOME/.local/share/applications/mimeapps.list.
YEAHHH!!! Finally someone who stepped forward and *explained* what to
do instead o
Am Freitag, den 11.02.2011, 17:11 +0100 schrieb Leo "costela" Antunes:
> On 11/02/11 16:49, Norbert Preining wrote:
> > On Fr, 11 Feb 2011, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> >> $ grep x-scheme-handler/http /usr/share/applications/mimeinfo.cache
> >> x-scheme-handler/http=midori.desktop;chromium-browser.desk
Le mardi 15 février 2011 à 11:30 +0100, Fabian Greffrath a écrit :
> > The disappearance of this applet in git master is very concerning, but I
> > just received mention on IRC (thanks fredp) that the functionality will
> > be back soon.
>
> I see, it will most probably become part of the System
The disappearance of this applet in git master is very concerning, but I
just received mention on IRC (thanks fredp) that the functionality will
be back soon.
I see, it will most probably become part of the System Information tab:
http://live.gnome.org/Design/SystemSettings/SystemInformation
Le lundi 14 février 2011 à 15:33 +0100, Fabian Greffrath a écrit :
> It seems the panel to set the preferred applications has been removed
> from future versions of the control center on purpose of the GNOME
> developers:
>
> http://osdir.com/ml/fedora-development/2011-02/msg00116.html
The dis
Le mardi 15 février 2011 à 01:03 +0900, Norbert Preining a écrit :
> > The defaults are set in /etc/gnome/defaults.list. This file is used in
>
> And per user?
.local/share/applications/defaults.list and mimeapps.list
The former sets defaults associations, the latter is necessary to add
associat
On Mo, 14 Feb 2011, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > How is that default communicated? An environment variable? A gconf key?
>
> The defaults are set in /etc/gnome/defaults.list. This file is used in
And per user?
> Good. We can probably let it migrate once epiphany and iceweasel have
> been fixed; u
Le lundi 14 février 2011 à 14:28 +0100, Raphael Hertzog a écrit :
> On Mon, 14 Feb 2011, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > There will be a default selected in gnome-session, that can be changed
> > by user action. Without a session-wide default (any session manager can
> > set one, of course) a random c
There will be a default selected in gnome-session, that can be changed
by user action. Without a session-wide default (any session manager can
set one, of course) a random choice (possibly alphabetical) is used.
It seems the panel to set the preferred applications has been removed
from future v
On Mo, 14 Feb 2011, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> We are used to have much more terrible breakage in testing/unstable
> right after a release. If our concerns are now bugs wrt. setting the
> default browser, it must mean we are doing *great* :)
Aehmm, I have set the default browser in about 10 places
On Mon, 14 Feb 2011, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > How is one supposed to prioritize between the various browsers?
>
> There will be a default selected in gnome-session, that can be changed
> by user action. Without a session-wide default (any session manager can
> set one, of course) a random choic
On Lu, 14 feb 11, 12:33:49, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> >
> > How is one supposed to prioritize between the various browsers?
>
> There will be a default selected in gnome-session, that can be changed
> by user action. Without a session-wide default (any session manager can
> set one, of course) a
Le lundi 14 février 2011 à 12:26 +0100, Raphael Hertzog a écrit :
> > There are defaults shipped in gnome-session, precisely to avoid that
> > kind of issue.
> >
> > With glib 2.28, the x-scheme-handler/* stuff becomes the new priority.
> > It just means we have to update epiphany to include it a
Hi,
On Mon, 14 Feb 2011, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le samedi 12 février 2011 à 01:15 +0900, Norbert Preining a écrit :
> > > I'd say it should probably be reported as a minor bug in gvfs-open, to
> > > respect gnome settings before falling back to mimeinfo.cache.
> >
> > I consider that not mino
Le samedi 12 février 2011 à 01:15 +0900, Norbert Preining a écrit :
> > I'd say it should probably be reported as a minor bug in gvfs-open, to
> > respect gnome settings before falling back to mimeinfo.cache.
>
> I consider that not minor. If alphabetic order is what I am forced to
> live with, t
On Fr, 11 Feb 2011, Josh Triplett wrote:
> See http://bugs.debian.org/612876 for the bug report. I encountered the
> same issue, and finally found the culprit through reading the
> chromium-browser changelog.
Umpf, I have removed the x-scheme-handler/http and x-scheme-handler/https
ffrom the chro
See http://bugs.debian.org/612876 for the bug report. I encountered the
same issue, and finally found the culprit through reading the
chromium-browser changelog.
- Josh Triplett
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
> iceweasel.desktop doesn't really solve the issue, because there doesn't
> seem to be a mechanism to define priorities in update-desktop-database,
> so gvfs-open uses the first entry in mimeinfo.cache.
Umpf, so we are either forced to always use what comes
alphabetically first, or remove package
On 11/02/11 16:49, Norbert Preining wrote:
> On Fr, 11 Feb 2011, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
>> $ grep x-scheme-handler/http /usr/share/applications/mimeinfo.cache
>> x-scheme-handler/http=midori.desktop;chromium-browser.desktop;
>> x-scheme-handler/https=midori.desktop;chromium-browser.desktop;
>>
>> A
On Fr, 11 Feb 2011, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> $ grep x-scheme-handler/http /usr/share/applications/mimeinfo.cache
> x-scheme-handler/http=midori.desktop;chromium-browser.desktop;
> x-scheme-handler/https=midori.desktop;chromium-browser.desktop;
>
> And it takes precedence over what you quoted.
Tha
Norbert Preining (12/02/2011):
> I checked:
> - alternatives of: x-www-browser, sensible-browser, www-browser, gnome-browser
> and all of them point to iceweasel
> - checked the "preferred applications" in GNOME and it also shows
> iceweasel
> - checked with
> xdg-settings get default-web
On 08/10/2010 09:25 PM, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
>> > Chromium isn't meant to be released with Squeeze. We'll reevaluate for
>> > Squeeze+1.
> Is that still the case?
No, it isn't. Please see #581265 and in particular message #32, #37 and #44
Cheers,
Giuseppe.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP
On Tue, 2010-05-11 at 20:55 +0200, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
> On 2010-05-11, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> > Surely not. Chromium ships a *private* copy of ffmpeg, more precisely, a
> > fork of ffmpeg called ffmpeg-mt. Debian does not include ffmpeg-mt
> > because of bug #575600 (tagged wontfix). Mor
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 06:27:43AM -0600, Aaron Toponce wrote:
> On 06/30/2010 01:18 AM, Giuseppe Iuculano wrote:
> > On 06/30/2010 06:15 AM, Aaron Toponce wrote:
> >> I just noticed that the chromium-browser package releases in Debian
> >> GNU/Linux unstable are synced version-for-version with the
On Mi, 30 iun 10, 06:27:43, Aaron Toponce wrote:
>
> Well, when you put it that way. :) Honestly, I don't think of Sid as a
> collection of stable packages. That's what I think about Lenny. I think
> of Sid as "the latest and greatest", regardless of version, and that's
> why I thought the nightli
Aaron Toponce wrote:
> On 06/30/2010 01:18 AM, Giuseppe Iuculano wrote:
>> Should we use the Chromium nightly builds ? Really? :)
>
> Well, when you put it that way. :) Honestly, I don't think of Sid as a
> collection of stable packages. That's what I think about Lenny. I think
> of Sid as "the l
On 06/30/2010 01:18 AM, Giuseppe Iuculano wrote:
> On 06/30/2010 06:15 AM, Aaron Toponce wrote:
>> I just noticed that the chromium-browser package releases in Debian
>> GNU/Linux unstable are synced version-for-version with the google-chrome
>> beta package provided by the 3rd party Google Linux r
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 10:15:11PM -0600, Aaron Toponce wrote:
> I just noticed that the chromium-browser package releases in Debian
> GNU/Linux unstable are synced version-for-version with the google-chrome
> beta package provided by the 3rd party Google Linux repository. Is this
> intentional? Wh
On 06/30/2010 06:15 AM, Aaron Toponce wrote:
> I just noticed that the chromium-browser package releases in Debian
> GNU/Linux unstable are synced version-for-version with the google-chrome
> beta package provided by the 3rd party Google Linux repository. Is this
> intentional?
No, we follow the s
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 03:34:06 (CEST), Andreas Marschke wrote:
>> What I could imagine is to seperate out the ffmpeg module into a
>> seperate source package, and ship it in a 3rd party repository outside
>> of debian squeeze.
>>
> Wouldn't this be a perfect candidate for debimedia?
Probably
> What I could imagine is to seperate out the ffmpeg module into a
> seperate source package, and ship it in a 3rd party repository outside
> of debian squeeze.
>
Wouldn't this be a perfect candidate for debimedia? And since it's the source
code only that we distribute with the package it shouldn
On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 2:31 AM, Giuseppe Iuculano wrote:
> Il 12/05/2010 06:38, Reinhard Tartler ha scritto:
>> TBH, I'm very skeptical. While I'm not sure why google has decided to
>> choose astrange's branch/fork, I fear that there have been too many
>> changes to the external public API that t
On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 05:43:37AM +, Sune Vuorela wrote:
> It is the 3rd copy of webkit code in the archive, again most likely
> from a different branch point. (webkit source package building the gtk
> frontend to webkit, qt4-x11 building qtwebkit and now chrome)
Right, but it's no more the f
Il 12/05/2010 06:38, Reinhard Tartler ha scritto:
> TBH, I'm very skeptical. While I'm not sure why google has decided to
> choose astrange's branch/fork, I fear that there have been too many
> changes to the external public API that this is not going to work out.
> I'm basing this opinion on the G
On 2010-05-11, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> I understand that the security team might be skeptical about security
> support, but IIRC past vetoes from the security team came from software
> with bad _history_ of security support, while in this case it would seem
> a preemptive move, isn't it?
It i
On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 00:29:02 (CEST), Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 08:55:17PM +0200, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
>> > Surely not. Chromium ships a *private* copy of ffmpeg, more precisely, a
>> > fork of ffmpeg called ffmpeg-mt. Debian does not include ffmpeg-mt
>> > becaus
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 23:53:51 +0200, Giuseppe Iuculano wrote:
> Il 11/05/2010 17:35, Ben Hutchings ha scritto:
>
> > How can you expect this to work? The ABI of the system ffmpeg libraries
> > is not going to match the ABI defined by the bundled headers. You must
> > patch chromium to work w
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 08:55:17PM +0200, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
> > Surely not. Chromium ships a *private* copy of ffmpeg, more precisely, a
> > fork of ffmpeg called ffmpeg-mt. Debian does not include ffmpeg-mt
> > because of bug #575600 (tagged wontfix). Moreover, Debian's copy of
> > ffmpeg
Il 11/05/2010 17:35, Ben Hutchings ha scritto:
> How can you expect this to work? The ABI of the system ffmpeg libraries
> is not going to match the ABI defined by the bundled headers. You must
> patch chromium to work with the system ffmpeg headers.
chromium doesn't link against the ffmpeg lib
On 2010-05-11, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 22:36:00 (CEST), Giuseppe Iuculano wrote:
>
>> Chromium in Debian is built against the system FFmpeg headers via
>> pkg-config. This means when Chromium is launched it will assume that
>> FFmpeg is present in the system library path
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 17:27:31 (CEST), Giuseppe Iuculano wrote:
> severity 580947 important
> thanks
For the record, after reading your latest mail, I still disagree with
this assessment, but won't play BTW ping pong.
> Il 11/05/2010 10:44, Reinhard Tartler ha scritto:
>> I can only assume tha
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 05:27:31PM +0200, Giuseppe Iuculano wrote:
[...]
> chromium doesn't compile with the current version of ffmpeg in unstable
> because it is too outdated, this means I had three choices:
>
> - compile with use_system_ffmpeg=0 and build_ffmpegsumo=0 (this means
> drop ffmpeg s
severity 580947 important
thanks
Il 11/05/2010 10:44, Reinhard Tartler ha scritto:
> checking [2], reveals that I'm partly wrong. There is an in-source copy
> of ffmpeg, that there is an option 'use_system_ffmpeg=1' passed to the
> buildscript. This indicates that I indeed missed that upstream now
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 10:22:02 (CEST), Philipp Kern wrote:
> On 2010-05-11, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
>> [1] http://experimental.ftbfs.de/chromium-browser (unavailable at time
>> of writing)
>
> experimental.ftbfs.de is down for good. I guess you meant [0] or similar.
>
> Kind regards,
> Phi
Hi,
On 11/05/10 10:13, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> [1] http://experimental.ftbfs.de/chromium-browser (unavailable at time
> of writing)
Experimental is now on buildd.d.o, see
https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=chromium-browser&suite=experimental
Cheers,
Emilio
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE,
On 2010-05-11, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> [1] http://experimental.ftbfs.de/chromium-browser (unavailable at time
> of writing)
experimental.ftbfs.de is down for good. I guess you meant [0] or similar.
Kind regards,
Philipp Kern
[0]
https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=chromium-br
severity 580947 serious
stop
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 07:39:12 (CEST), Joey Hess wrote:
> Reinhard Tartler wrote:
>> Surely not. Chromium ships a *private* copy of ffmpeg, more precisely, a
>> fork of ffmpeg called ffmpeg-mt. Debian does not include ffmpeg-mt
>> because of bug #575600 (tagged wont
Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> Surely not. Chromium ships a *private* copy of ffmpeg, more precisely, a
> fork of ffmpeg called ffmpeg-mt. Debian does not include ffmpeg-mt
> because of bug #575600 (tagged wontfix). Moreover, Debian's copy of
> ffmpeg will always be out-of-date.
>
> I wonder why the se
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 22:15:28 (CEST), Iker Salmón San Millán wrote:
> Hi, i didn't know where or how to report this, but i have readed in a forum
> that an user has tried chromium-browser from experimental and seems that it
> includes by default those privative codecs.
As others have noted in
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 22:36:00 (CEST), Giuseppe Iuculano wrote:
> Chromium in Debian is built against the system FFmpeg headers via
> pkg-config. This means when Chromium is launched it will assume that
> FFmpeg is present in the system library path. In this way you can
> decide which codecs c
On Monday 10 May 2010 17:36:59 Sven Arvidsson wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-05-10 at 22:36 +0200, Giuseppe Iuculano wrote:
> > If you can watch youtube html5 video, probably you have installaed
> > libavcodec52, libavformat52 and libavutil50 from debian-multimedia[1] or
> > other third repositories.
>
> W
Giuseppe Iuculano writes:
> If you can watch youtube html5 video, probably you have installaed
> libavcodec52, libavformat52 and libavutil50 from debian-multimedia[1] or
> other third repositories.
Hmm? Mplayer in debian unstable plays youtube h.264 just fine. No
non-free stuff needed:
$ youtube
On Mon, 2010-05-10 at 22:36 +0200, Giuseppe Iuculano wrote:
> If you can watch youtube html5 video, probably you have installaed
> libavcodec52, libavformat52 and libavutil50 from debian-multimedia[1] or
> other third repositories.
Why? Debian ships decoders for H264, so it should work out of the
On 05/10/2010 10:44 PM, Iker Salmón San Millán wrote:
> I didn't report as a bug because there wasn't anything wrong with the
> usability, i tought it was something that goes against debian social
> contract.
Which would still be a bug, with a a release critical severity.
Best thing to do in such
El 10 de mayo de 2010 22:36, Giuseppe Iuculano escribió:
>
> No, it doesn't contain those, see below
>
> Chromium in Debian is built against the system FFmpeg headers via
> pkg-config. This means when Chromium is launched it will assume that
> FFmpeg is present in the system library path.
> In
Hi,
Il 10/05/2010 22:15, Iker Salmón San Millán ha scritto:
> Hi, i didn't know where or how to report this, but i have readed in a
> forum that an user has tried |chromium-browser from experimental and
> seems that it includes by default those privative codecs. I have tried
> by myself and i agre
57 matches
Mail list logo
