Chromium in Sid
in [Debian]
|
Prev: Brightness OSD in Squeeze
Next: GRUB Hard Disk Error
From: John Hasler on 21 May 2010 13:10 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 nightlies download them directly from upstream. -- John Hasler -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST(a)lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster(a)lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87zkzt2oih.fsf(a)thumper.dhh.gt.org
From: Kelly Clowers on 21 May 2010 13:40 On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 08:23, Steve Fishpaste <marathon.durandal(a)gmail.com> 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 the agenda to do? What's wrong with Google's repo? deb http://dl.google.com/linux/deb/ testing non-free It works fine on my Sid, and "google-chrome-unstable" has been at 6.0.x for some time. Cheers, Kelly Clowers -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST(a)lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster(a)lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/AANLkTinWGD-T-Wfc92K2rvkIhtA4PSFyRNR-STZOgXJ3(a)mail.gmail.com
From: Javier Barroso on 21 May 2010 14:00 On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 7:38 PM, Kelly Clowers <kelly.clowers(a)gmail.com>wrote: > On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 08:23, Steve Fishpaste > <marathon.durandal(a)gmail.com> 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 the agenda to do? > > What's wrong with Google's repo? > deb http://dl.google.com/linux/deb/ testing non-free What would be wrong if every app would have its own repository ? There is the problem, isn't it ? Having an unique repo have many advantages (not need to add / remove repositories when they start / die) If a package is in debian, you can know that it is integrated with the system almost perfectly, if you start adding more and more repositories you can lost the control. At least, I think so. Regards,
From: John L Fjellstad on 21 May 2010 17:10 Javier Barroso <javibarroso(a)gmail.com> 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 you absolutely have to have the latest at the moment upstream makes it available is an advantage. Especially if you disagree with the choices or patches that the maintainer added to package. -- John L. Fjellstad web: http://www.fjellstad.org/ Quis custodiet ipsos custodes -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST(a)lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster(a)lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87aart9dav.fsf(a)minerva.secundus.fjellstad.intern
From: John on 21 May 2010 17:30
On 21/05/10, John Hasler (jhasler(a)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 "experimental." -- JohnRChamplin(a)columbus.rr.com ==================================================== GPG key 1024D/99421A63 2005-01-05 EE51 79E9 F244 D734 A012 1CEC 7813 9FE9 9942 1A63 gpg --keyserver subkeys.pgp.net --recv-keys 99421A63 |