On 2020-04-12, Allan Streib wrote:
> Patrick Harper writes:
>
>> My understanding of -current is that it is meant for testing, not usage.
>
> Not strictly true. Depends on your needs, and tolerance for things not
> always working perfectly.
Things *should* work just as well in -current as -stabl
On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 10:18:13PM +0100, Patrick Harper wrote:
> My understanding of -current is that it is meant for testing, not usage.
On the contrary. Or at least: for testing, BY usage!
Cheers,
Erling
> --
> Patrick Harper
> paia...@fastmail.com
>
> On Sun, 12 Apr 2020, at 21:38, Kev
Patrick Harper writes:
> My understanding of -current is that it is meant for testing, not usage.
Not strictly true. Depends on your needs, and tolerance for things not
always working perfectly.
Allan
I'm puzzled that you thought my statements were a complaint.
--
Patrick Harper
paia...@fastmail.com
On Sun, 12 Apr 2020, at 22:30, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> Patrick Harper wrote:
>
> > I mean that all Chromium releases are made available for OpenBSD-stable
> > (excluding the previous release
Patrick Harper wrote:
> I mean that all Chromium releases are made available for OpenBSD-stable
> (excluding the previous release at any given time, as with all existing port
> maintenance).
So you want constant Chromium updates in -stable.
Who's going to do that?
Are you going to do it?
An
I mean that all Chromium releases are made available for OpenBSD-stable
(excluding the previous release at any given time, as with all existing port
maintenance).
My understanding of -current is that it is meant for testing, not usage.
--
Patrick Harper
paia...@fastmail.com
On Sun, 12 Apr
On April 12, 2020 7:07:01 PM UTC, Patrick Harper wrote:
>The effort to support Chromium and Firefox (sans ESR) on OpenBSD akin
>to Windows/macOS/'Linux' has not happened.
On atleast current as Theo showed, Chromium is just as well if not better
supported on OpenBSD than on Linux, these days.
I
The effort to support Chromium and Firefox (sans ESR) on OpenBSD akin to
Windows/macOS/'Linux' has not happened.
--
Patrick Harper
paia...@fastmail.com
On Sun, 12 Apr 2020, at 16:49, Raymond, David wrote:
> My problem with iridium is that it is based on an older version of
> chromium and I
Theo,
Thanks for your explanations. I appreciate the efforts of you and
your colleagues in keeping OpenBSD as up to date and secure as
possible. That is one of the main reasons I am using it.
Dave Raymond
On 4/12/20, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> Raymond, David wrote:
>
>> That said, I am a bit ner
Elias M. Mariani wrote:
> Actually, I was just checking the ports-changes mailing-list, and the
> sync between Iridium and Chromium made me ask this.
Step right up, step right up, there's room for volunteers
Actually, I was just checking the ports-changes mailing-list, and the
sync between Iridium and Chromium made me ask this.
In any case, OpenBSD ports has nothing to do with this question. I ask
here just because the OpenBSD community has a better view of this
things. And (so far) they had made inter
Raymond, David wrote:
> That said, I am a bit nervous about OpenBSD's lags in
> keeping up with browser security fixes.
It isn't that simple.
They don't ship security fixes standalone. Instead, they ship a mix of
new changes *and* fixes. Lots of new unrelated changes, and only a few
security
My problem with iridium is that it is based on an older version of
chromium and I am not sure that they keep up with inevitable flow of
security fixes. That said, I am a bit nervous about OpenBSD's lags in
keeping up with browser security fixes. (I'm not criticizing -- I
understand that OpenBSD i
I'm not much of a browser savy guy.
Is Iridium really safer than Chromium?
Leaving aside the "Google is tracking you!".
Any recommendations on the browser front on performance, security and
compatibility?
I've been using Chrome and Chromium for years, but maybe there are
better alternatives that I
14 matches
Mail list logo
