On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 05:28:26PM -0700, Bob Proulx wrote:
> Stephen Allen wrote:
> > Bob Proulx wrote:
> > > Stephen Allen wrote:
> > > > I don't use the Debian Chromium as it's too old.
> > >
> > > I think you must be thinking of the Chromium in Stable Squeeze which
> > > released with version
Stephen Allen wrote:
> Bob Proulx wrote:
> > Stephen Allen wrote:
> > > I don't use the Debian Chromium as it's too old.
> >
> > I think you must be thinking of the Chromium in Stable Squeeze which
> > released with version 6. That isn't the one under discussion. Stable
> > is stable and so that
On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 05:37:26PM -0700, Bob Proulx wrote:
> Stephen Allen wrote:
> > > The linux Chrome binary from Google appears to work fine on both machines.
> >
> > I don't use the Debian Chromium as it's too old.
>
> I think you must be thinking of the Chromium in Stable Squeeze which
>
Stephen Allen wrote:
> David Bruce wrote:
> > I have two Sid systems (one amd64, one 32-bit intel) and Chromium is
> > currently unusable in both - all attempted pages display "Aw, Snap",
> > even content on same machine. There appears to be a bug on this:
> >
> > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/b
On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 07:05:10PM -0600, David Bruce wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have two Sid systems (one amd64, one 32-bit intel) and Chromium is
> currently unusable in both - all attempted pages display "Aw, Snap",
> even content on same machine. There appears to be a bug on this:
>
> http://bugs.de
David Bruce wrote:
> I have two Sid systems (one amd64, one 32-bit intel) and Chromium is
> currently unusable in both - all attempted pages display "Aw, Snap",
> even content on same machine. There appears to be a bug on this:
>
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=647992
>
> but
Hi,
I have two Sid systems (one amd64, one 32-bit intel) and Chromium is
currently unusable in both - all attempted pages display "Aw, Snap",
even content on same machine. There appears to be a bug on this:
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=647992
but I get the sense that the mai
rimental, and work fine for me:
> >>
> >> ...but we're not talking about experimental now, are we? :)
> >
> > Yup I was originally as that's where Chromium was at first.
>
> Sid != experimental. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you started the thread
> about C
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 07:27:02AM -0500, John Hasler uttered:
> Steve Fishpaste writes:
> > With Chromium there is no "stable" or "beta" it's a development
> > branch. So being the development branch,
>
> If it truly has no stable (or even beta) branch it should not be
> anywhere in Debian except
On Wednesday 26 May 2010 11:05:18 Andrei Popescu wrote:
> On Wed,26.May.10, 09:52:00, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
> > > If it truly has no stable (or even beta) branch it should not be
> > > anywhere in Debian except Experimental.
> >
> > Agreed. Sid is only for packages that may be appropriate
On Wed,26.May.10, 09:52:00, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
> > If it truly has no stable (or even beta) branch it should not be
> > anywhere in Debian except Experimental.
>
> Agreed. Sid is only for packages that may be appropriate for a Debian
> release
> at some point in the future. A deve
On Wednesday 26 May 2010 07:27:02 John Hasler wrote:
> Steve Fishpaste writes:
> > With Chromium there is no "stable" or "beta" it's a development
> > branch. So being the development branch,
>
> If it truly has no stable (or even beta) branch it should not be
> anywhere in Debian except Experimen
Steve Fishpaste writes:
> With Chromium there is no "stable" or "beta" it's a development
> branch. So being the development branch,
If it truly has no stable (or even beta) branch it should not be
anywhere in Debian except Experimental.
--
John Hasler
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-
ntal now, are we? :)
>
> Yup I was originally as that's where Chromium was at first.
Sid != experimental. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you started the thread
about Chromium in Sid, not in experimental, and there hasn't been
mention of experimental until now.
So, care to clar
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 11:50:11AM -0500, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. uttered:
[ ...] discussion on why I chose Sid on a workstation/laptop.
> I used Etch on my desktop and Laptop for quite a while with little to no loss
> of functionality. I don't really understand why you think you need the
> la
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 07:18:12AM -0600, Aaron Toponce uttered:
> On 05/24/2010 12:42 AM, Javier Barroso wrote:
> > It is in experimental, and work fine for me:
>
> ...but we're not talking about experimental now, are we? :)
Yup I was originally as that's where Chromium was at first.
--
To UN
On Saturday 22 May 2010 12:08:39 Steve Fishpaste wrote:
> On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 11:41:38AM -0500, John Hasler uttered:
> > JohnRChamplin writes:
> > > ...which used to be available from unstable, but which I have heard is
> > > now in sid.
> >
> > Unstable _is_ Sid.
> >
> > In any case, a few w
On 05/24/2010 12:42 AM, Javier Barroso wrote:
> It is in experimental, and work fine for me:
...but we're not talking about experimental now, are we? :)
--
. O . O . O . . O O . . . O .
. . O . O O O . O . O O . . O
O O O . O . . O O O O . O O O
signature.asc
Descripti
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 6:00 AM, Aaron Toponce wrote:
> On 05/21/2010 09:23 AM, Steve Fishpaste wrote:
> > Why is the Chromium-browser in Sid so old? Chromium has been on the
> > 6.x branch for a couple of weeks now and Debian is still using the 5.x
> > branch.
>
> You must be rather upset then, t
On 05/21/2010 09:23 AM, Steve Fishpaste wrote:
> Why is the Chromium-browser in Sid so old? Chromium has been on the
> 6.x branch for a couple of weeks now and Debian is still using the 5.x
> branch.
You must be rather upset then, that upstream Firefox 3.6 released
January 21, 2010, yet Iceweasel
Il 23/05/2010 11:29, Jonathan Nieder ha scritto:
>> In my opinion we should keep up with the new releases at least weekly.
>> Is this on the agenda to do?
>
> No, I do not think it is in the plans any time soon:
>
> - sid is used to stage versions that could potentially be used in
>some stab
Hi Steve,
Steve Fishpaste wrote:
> In my opinion we should keep up with the new releases at least weekly.
> Is this on the agenda to do?
No, I do not think it is in the plans any time soon:
- sid is used to stage versions that could potentially be used in
some stable release. I can’t see a
On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 1:08 PM, Steve Fishpaste
wrote:
...
> If Debian isn't going to keep up with the current trunk; then there
> really is no point in packaging it here. As it stands I'm not going to
> go backwards a full version, so I have reverted to the PPA builds.
>
I'm confused about what
Hello Nate Bargmann,
Am 2010-05-22 07:04:26, hacktest Du folgendes herunter:
> Just a personal perception here, it seems as though OpenOffice gets
> updated, mostly advancement of Debian versions, quite frequently.
> Sometimes frequently enough that I get a bit annoyed at it while some
> other pac
On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 11:41:38AM -0500, John Hasler uttered:
> JohnRChamplin writes:
> > ...which used to be available from unstable, but which I have heard is
> > now in sid.
>
> Unstable _is_ Sid.
>
> In any case, a few weeks is not old.
It is on a fast moving target, and especially in the c
Hello Andrei Popescu,
Am 2010-05-21 18:53:34, hacktest Du folgendes herunter:
> > but the question is why
> > is it so old when Ubuntu is keeping up-to-date daily?!
> Wasn't there some automatic download/recompile going on in PPA? Or maybe
> the Ubuntu
On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 10:38:02AM -0700, Kelly Clowers uttered:
> On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 08:23, Steve Fishpaste
> wrote:
> > Good morning folks.
> >
> > Why is the Chromium-browser in Sid so old? Chromium has been on the
> > 6.x branch for a couple of weeks now and Debian is still using the 5.x
On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 12:27:35PM -0400, John uttered:
> On 21/05/10, Steve Fishpaste (marathon.duran...@gmail.com) wrote:
>
> |
> | Why is the Chromium-browser in Sid so old?
>
> There seem to be three versions of the browser available:
> 1. google-chrome-unstable, currently at 6.0.401.1-r4704
On Sat,22.May.10, 07:04:26, Nate Bargmann wrote:
> I've not checked it out closely, but is alioth.debian.org similar to
> Ubuntu's Launchpad where community members can set up their own personal
> archive? It seems as though someone who shows a personal interest and
> (pardon the pun) aptitude w
* On 2010 22 May 06:42 -0500, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> Please understand releasing big packages such as this one so frequenly will
> stress many porting efforts for no obvious gains.
>
> There are many other packages which we are really behind.
Just a personal perception here, it seems as though Ope
On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 11:04 PM, John L Fjellstad <
john-deb...@fjellstad.org> wrote:
> Javier Barroso writes:
>
> > What would be wrong if every app would have its own repository ?
>
> Nothing
>
> > There is the problem, isn't it ?
>
> No
>
So, if you have 1480 packages, is it fine for you hav
Hi,
On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 11:48:44AM -0400, Steve Fishpaste wrote:
> On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 10:42:16AM -0500, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. uttered:
> > On Friday 21 May 2010 10:23:15 Steve Fishpaste wrote:
> > > In my opinion we should keep up with the new releases at least weekly.
> > > Is this on t
On 05/21/2010 11:41 AM, John Hasler wrote:
JohnRChamplin writes:
...which used to be available from unstable, but which I have heard is
now in sid.
Unstable _is_ Sid.
In any case, a few weeks is not old.
It is if you're 16...
--
Dissent is patriotic, remember?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
On 05/21/2010 10:38 AM, Andrei Popescu wrote:
On Fri,21.May.10, 11:23:15, Steve Fishpaste wrote:
Good morning folks.
Why is the Chromium-browser in Sid so old? Chromium has been on the
6.x branch for a couple of weeks now and Debian is still using the 5.x
branch.
In my opinion we should keep u
On 21/05/10, John Hasler (jhas...@debian.org) wrote:
| JohnRChamplin writes:
| > ...which used to be available from unstable, but which I have heard is
| > now in sid.
|
| Unstable _is_ Sid.
|
| In any case, a few weeks is not old.
Thanks for picking up my typo; I meant, of course, to say
"expe
Javier Barroso writes:
> What would be wrong if every app would have its own repository ?
Nothing
> There is the problem, isn't it ?
No
> Having an unique repo have many advantages (not need to add / remove
> repositories when they start / die)
Having an unique repository for packages that y
On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 7:38 PM, Kelly Clowers wrote:
> On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 08:23, Steve Fishpaste
> wrote:
> > Good morning folks.
> >
> > Why is the Chromium-browser in Sid so old? Chromium has been on the
> > 6.x branch for a couple of weeks now and Debian is still using the 5.x
> > branch
On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 08:23, Steve Fishpaste
wrote:
> Good morning folks.
>
> Why is the Chromium-browser in Sid so old? Chromium has been on the
> 6.x branch for a couple of weeks now and Debian is still using the 5.x
> branch.
>
> In my opinion we should keep up with the new releases at least
Steve Fishpaste writes:
> If they're not going to keep up with upstream, then why in the hell
> bother.
Because they don't share your rather extreme definition of keeping up.
> People want a recent release in a web browser, especially in Sid!
A few weeks old is recent. If you must have current
JohnRChamplin writes:
> ...which used to be available from unstable, but which I have heard is
> now in sid.
Unstable _is_ Sid.
In any case, a few weeks is not old.
--
John Hasler
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Conta
On 21/05/10, Steve Fishpaste (marathon.duran...@gmail.com) wrote:
|
| Why is the Chromium-browser in Sid so old?
There seem to be three versions of the browser available:
1. google-chrome-unstable, currently at 6.0.401.1-r47049, from google.
2. chromium-browser, currently at 5.0.375.38~r46659-1,
On 05/21/2010 11:32 AM, jeremy jozwik wrote:
on Fri, May 21, 2010 at 8:23 AM, Steve Fishpaste
wrote:
Why is the Chromium-browser in Sid so old? Chromium has been on the
6.x branch for a couple of weeks now and Debian is still using the 5.x
branch.
question, on lenny is there a diffe
On 2010-05-21 18:01 +0200, Andrei Popescu wrote:
> And one more thing: if the package in sid/unstable is updated too often
> it will never migrate to testing, because it has to be at least 10 days
> old (assuming no bugs are found and there are no dependency problems).
As long as the package is
On Friday 21 May 2010 10:48:44 Steve Fishpaste wrote:
> On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 10:42:16AM -0500, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. uttered:
> > On Friday 21 May 2010 10:23:15 Steve Fishpaste wrote:
> > > In my opinion we should keep up with the new releases at least weekly.
> > > Is this on the agenda to do?
On 2010-05-21 17:42 +0200, Steve Fishpaste wrote:
> I'd be happy to contribute in any way I can, but the question is why
> is it so old when Ubuntu is keeping up-to-date daily?!
Note that Ubuntu is doing that in a PPA, not in their development
release. I suspect that Chromium 6 has to wait for l
[sorry for replying to myself]
On Fri,21.May.10, 18:53:34, Andrei Popescu wrote:
> On Fri,21.May.10, 11:42:57, Steve Fishpaste wrote:
>
> > but the question is why
> > is it so old when Ubuntu is keeping up-to-date daily?!
>
> Wasn't there some automa
On Sex, 21 Mai 2010, Steve Fishpaste wrote:
I'd be happy to contribute in any way I can, but the question is why
is it so old when Ubuntu is keeping up-to-date daily?!
Software does not package itself automatically. There's only so much
that the maintainers can do, especially when they have o
On Fri,21.May.10, 11:42:57, Steve Fishpaste wrote:
> >
> > I'm sure the maintainer will be glad to accept you help ;)
>
> I'd be happy to contribute in any way I can,
You could try contacting the maintainer. The easiest way is to mail
@packages.debian.org ;)
>
On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 10:42:16AM -0500, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. uttered:
> On Friday 21 May 2010 10:23:15 Steve Fishpaste wrote:
> > In my opinion we should keep up with the new releases at least weekly.
> > Is this on the agenda to do?
>
> You volunteering? Contact the maintainer(s).
Sure if I
On Fri,21.May.10, 08:32:56, jeremy jozwik wrote:
> question, on lenny is there a different repository for chromium? just
> did a apt search to find chromium.
According to http://packages.debian.org/chromium-browser [1] it is only
available in sid/unstable. backports.org usually carries newer ve
On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 11:39:33AM -0400, Jordan Metzmeier uttered:
> On 05/21/2010 11:23 AM, Steve Fishpaste wrote:
> >Good morning folks.
> >
> >Why is the Chromium-browser in Sid so old? Chromium has been on the
> >6.x branch for a couple of weeks now and Debian is still using the 5.x
> >branch.
On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 06:38:35PM +0300, Andrei Popescu uttered:
> On Fri,21.May.10, 11:23:15, Steve Fishpaste wrote:
> > Good morning folks.
> >
> > Why is the Chromium-browser in Sid so old? Chromium has been on the
> > 6.x branch for a couple of weeks now and Debian is still using the 5.x
> >
On Friday 21 May 2010 10:23:15 Steve Fishpaste wrote:
> In my opinion we should keep up with the new releases at least weekly.
> Is this on the agenda to do?
You volunteering? Contact the maintainer(s).
If not, you'll just have to wait for the other volunteers to get around to it.
IIRC, the pol
On 05/21/2010 11:23 AM, Steve Fishpaste wrote:
Good morning folks.
Why is the Chromium-browser in Sid so old? Chromium has been on the
6.x branch for a couple of weeks now and Debian is still using the 5.x
branch.
In my opinion we should keep up with the new releases at least weekly.
Is this on
On Fri,21.May.10, 11:23:15, Steve Fishpaste wrote:
> Good morning folks.
>
> Why is the Chromium-browser in Sid so old? Chromium has been on the
> 6.x branch for a couple of weeks now and Debian is still using the 5.x
> branch.
>
> In my opinion we should keep up with the new releases at least we
on Fri, May 21, 2010 at 8:23 AM, Steve Fishpaste
wrote:
> Why is the Chromium-browser in Sid so old? Chromium has been on the
> 6.x branch for a couple of weeks now and Debian is still using the 5.x
> branch.
question, on lenny is there a different repository for chromium? just
did a apt search t
Good morning folks.
Why is the Chromium-browser in Sid so old? Chromium has been on the
6.x branch for a couple of weeks now and Debian is still using the 5.x
branch.
In my opinion we should keep up with the new releases at least weekly.
Is this on the agenda to do?
Cheers,
Steve
Toronto
--
57 matches
Mail list logo
