You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
What are plans and is the current situation wrt to publishing binaries, in particular those that can be used on *.deb based systems?
At the time of writing the ungoogled-chromium-debian repository has seen its last commit in November and seems to be stalled? Is @braewoods still active there?
@Elostonstates that he won't use OBS for now for portablelinux in order not to interfere with the OBS Debian builds and thus portablelinux binaries do not get built automatically. There are issues #86 and #50 requesting official portable OBS builds and tentatively asking if using OBS would be OK and #50 offering help.
Meanwhile the portablelinux repository is seeing commits by @Eloston but there are seemingly no publicly available binaries as a result?
Is the problem that the main committers (@braewoods and @Eloston ?) are lacking time and/or motivation to deal with the infrastructure and tickets here?
I guess it should be possible for someone to fork these projects once more and set up CI for portablelinux but then again, the chaos of these many repos is already very hard to understand and to follow so yet another fork wouldn't improve this particular problematic aspect?
@berkley4 seems to have taken that road with his fork that adds other patches, makes releases however is also at v96.
So I'd like to ask if the main committers could maybe chime in and tell where they want this project and these repos to go?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
tpo
changed the title
what is the current situation wrt to published binaries?
what are plans and current situation wrt to published binaries?
Jan 19, 2022
Somewhat related to the topic, I'm more specifically interested in the state of portable build for musl libc. It is currently the only way known to me, besides compiling from source, to have ungoogled-chromium on Alpine Linux, as its developers stubbornly refuse to maintain packages of browser forks.
Currently, the build "Portable Linux 64-bit (for musl libc)" sits at the version 84.0.4147.135-1.musl1. This version of Chromium has several critical bugs, crashing the browser every now and then. Any chance for an update? @Cubified ?
Edit: I just saw that there is a more recent release, however, it is still not very recent (85.0.4183.102-1.musl1).
Hi @Strahinja -- It's been a while since I've contributed to this project, but I'd be open to providing an updated binary. Unfortunately, I'll be on the other side of the US from my Alpine machine for another month or so.
In the meantime you can try compiling it on your own, but be warned it's a fairly touch-and-go process of fixing glibc-specific behavior (which is why I stopped contributing binaries a few years ago). I will say the main reason I remember for compilation failures was because musl doesn't support mallinfo, at least last I checked.
What are plans and is the current situation wrt to publishing binaries, in particular those that can be used on *.deb based systems?
At the time of writing the ungoogled-chromium-debian repository has seen its last commit in November and seems to be stalled? Is @braewoods still active there?
Also at this moment the last portablelinux release seems to be chrome v95, meanwhile chromium in Debian has seen a v97 release.
@Eloston states that he won't use OBS for now for portablelinux in order not to interfere with the OBS Debian builds and thus portablelinux binaries do not get built automatically. There are issues #86 and #50 requesting official portable OBS builds and tentatively asking if using OBS would be OK and #50 offering help.
Meanwhile the portablelinux repository is seeing commits by @Eloston but there are seemingly no publicly available binaries as a result?
Is the problem that the main committers (@braewoods and @Eloston ?) are lacking time and/or motivation to deal with the infrastructure and tickets here?
I guess it should be possible for someone to fork these projects once more and set up CI for portablelinux but then again, the chaos of these many repos is already very hard to understand and to follow so yet another fork wouldn't improve this particular problematic aspect?
@berkley4 seems to have taken that road with his fork that adds other patches, makes releases however is also at v96.
So I'd like to ask if the main committers could maybe chime in and tell where they want this project and these repos to go?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: