Demi Marie Obenour wrote:
> On 3/2/22 10:09, Tom Callaway wrote:
>> Additionally, Fedora uses GCC (intentionally) which requires patch work
>> for each release, but improves the quality of the resulting package.
>
> Would it be possible to make a one-off exception for Chromium?
There is actually
Demi Marie Obenour wrote:
> Arch uses the upstream *source* code, but not the binaries, if I
> understand correctly. They just don’t have anywhere near as many
> patches as Fedora does. I suspect this is a combination of factors.
> First, Arch builds use clang and more bundled libraries, so they
On Wed, Mar 02, 2022 at 04:07:43PM -, Leigh Scott wrote:
> > Fedora cannot use the default tarball due to legal restrictions.
> > Additionally, Fedora uses
> > GCC (intentionally) which requires patch work for each release, but
> > improves the quality
> > of the resulting package.
>
> So GC
On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 5:06 AM Demi Marie Obenour wrote:
> What would it take to get tall of the users of QtWebEngine onto 6.2? I
> don’t think Fedora should ship any version of QtWebEngine except the
> latest, since only the latest version appears to get regular patches.
Well, it is slightly m
On 3/2/22 10:09, Tom Callaway wrote:
> Apologies for the delays. My wife has been rather ill for a while, so my open
> source time has been greatly minimized lately.
I am so sorry.
> Fedora cannot use the default tarball due to legal restrictions.
Unfortunate but understandable. How much recur
Thanks, and thank you for maintaining chromium-freeworld in rpmfusion.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-U
> Fedora cannot use the default tarball due to legal restrictions.
> Additionally, Fedora uses
> GCC (intentionally) which requires patch work for each release, but improves
> the quality
> of the resulting package.
So GCC needs 125Gb of Ram to build chromium?
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji
> VAAPI hasn't worked for a long time on chromium. In "chrome://gpu" it shows
> "Video Decode: Software only. Hardware acceleration disabled" and it cannot be
> changed in "chrome://flags" either. This is the case for Fedora's packaged
> chromium and rpmfusion's chromium-freeworld. I encourage you
> We ship VA-API integration, which Google doesn't offer.
VAAPI hasn't worked for a long time on chromium. In "chrome://gpu" it shows
"Video Decode: Software only. Hardware acceleration disabled" and it cannot be
changed in "chrome://flags" either. This is the case for Fedora's packaged
chromiu
On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 9:19 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 02, 2022 at 07:08:07AM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > Those features provide tangible benefits to the community at large
> > that we would lose by "sloppy packaging". Instead of kvetching, why
> > not try helping? Mayb
Apologies for the delays. My wife has been rather ill for a while, so my open
source time has been greatly minimized lately.
Fedora cannot use the default tarball due to legal restrictions. Additionally,
Fedora uses GCC (intentionally) which requires patch work for each release, but
improves th
On Wed, Mar 02, 2022 at 07:08:07AM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> Those features provide tangible benefits to the community at large
> that we would lose by "sloppy packaging". Instead of kvetching, why
> not try helping? Maybe *ask* Tom what you could do to help him ship
> newer versions?
Neal,
plea
On 02/03/2022 12:44, Demi Marie Obenour wrote:
That doesn’t explain why RPM Fusion gets updates so much more
quickly.
RPM Fusion don't need to manually strip ffmpeg, apply some specific
patches, etc.
In the case of something like Chromium, a sloppy package that gets
timely updates is better
On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 6:44 AM Demi Marie Obenour wrote:
>
> On 3/2/22 04:05, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> > On 02/03/2022 01:21, Demi Marie Obenour wrote:
> >> What are the differences between the RPMFusion SRPM and the
> >> Fedora SRPM?
> >
> > RPM Fusion version includes all available mult
On 3/2/22 04:05, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> On 02/03/2022 01:21, Demi Marie Obenour wrote:
>> What are the differences between the RPMFusion SRPM and the
>> Fedora SRPM?
>
> RPM Fusion version includes all available multimedia codecs.
That doesn’t explain why RPM Fusion gets updates so muc
On 02/03/2022 02:45, Demi Marie Obenour wrote:
I am surprised that the answer is not to automatically
download and install Canonical’s Snap package
Absolutely no way. Everything must be built from sources on trusted
infra. No exceptions.
--
Sincerely,
Vitaly Zaitsev (vit...@easycoding.org)
On 02/03/2022 01:21, Demi Marie Obenour wrote:
What are the differences between the RPMFusion SRPM and the
Fedora SRPM?
RPM Fusion version includes all available multimedia codecs.
Tom Callaway, what is the hardest part for you?
Packaging of Google's software is a nightmare. They do their b
On 3/1/22 22:44, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
> Demi Marie Obenour wrote:
>> Me too. I am surprised that the answer is not to automatically
>> download and install Canonical’s Snap package; they seem to have
>> figured out everything already. Arch manages to do it by having very
>> few patches a
On 3/1/22 23:14, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Tue, 2022-03-01 at 19:21 -0500, Demi Marie Obenour wrote:
>> On 3/1/22 16:02, Jonathan Schleifer wrote:
>>> Hi!
>>>
>>> It looks like Chromium on Fedora is not receiving timely updates. It
>>> hasn't been updated in over a month and there were many bugs
On Tue, 2022-03-01 at 19:21 -0500, Demi Marie Obenour wrote:
> On 3/1/22 16:02, Jonathan Schleifer wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > It looks like Chromium on Fedora is not receiving timely updates. It
> > hasn't been updated in over a month and there were many bugs fixed
> > upstream. At the very least, C
Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
> (Well, technically, I suppose I could attempt to backport them from 90-
> based, i.e., from QtWebengine 6.2:
> https://code.qt.io/cgit/qt/qtwebengine-chromium.git/log/?h=90-based
> or even directly from Chromium upstream, but that is extremely time-
> consuming and n
Demi Marie Obenour wrote:
> Me too. I am surprised that the answer is not to automatically
> download and install Canonical’s Snap package; they seem to have
> figured out everything already. Arch manages to do it by having very
> few patches and using the upstream source tarball.
If you think t
On 3/1/22 19:42, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 1 2022 at 07:21:14 PM -0500, Demi Marie Obenour
> wrote:
>> Tom Callaway, what is the hardest part for you?
>
> Keep in mind Tom is a volunteer and Chromium packaging is not fun. I'm
> impressed that anybody is willing to attempt it tbh.
On Tue, Mar 1 2022 at 07:21:14 PM -0500, Demi Marie Obenour
wrote:
Tom Callaway, what is the hardest part for you?
Keep in mind Tom is a volunteer and Chromium packaging is not fun. I'm
impressed that anybody is willing to attempt it tbh.
Michael
___
On 3/1/22 16:02, Jonathan Schleifer wrote:
> Hi!
>
> It looks like Chromium on Fedora is not receiving timely updates. It
> hasn't been updated in over a month and there were many bugs fixed
> upstream. At the very least, Chromium on Fedora is vulnerable to the
> following:
>
> CVE-2022-0452:
25 matches
Mail list logo
