Re: [CentOS] And then there was one (browser)
On 02/09/2014 05:35 PM, Robert Arkiletian wrote: On Sat, Feb 8, 2014 at 2:41 PM, Johnny Hughes joh...@centos.org wrote: Sure, we talked to them (redhat). That does not make the code actually build any faster. The code does not build (as is) on EL6 and each build needs to be troubleshot and error corrected to make it work. Currently there are several pieces not building ... just like there were before. The 31 tree was finally made to build, after several changes, The 32 tree is not building. I like to use chromium as well ... but the only supported browser is Firefox ... that is the one with EL support. Chromium is a best effort to get to build (and it always will be) ... Google has no interest in supporting it, so we are taking the code that they release and working with it until it builds on EL6. Thanks for the update Johnny, In the meantime I have requested Remi's repo for Firefox 27. Why do you need Firefox 27 ... CentOS has the latest ESR version of Firefox (24.3.0) that gets security updates and it will always be the ESR version, so it will always get security updates and always move forward. So, moving forward and supported. http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/organizations/faq/ This firefox should be relevant, do almost everything the new one does, and be supportable within an organization. In fact, Mozilla chose to work with Enterprise Linux groups while Google basically thumbed their noses at the prospect. Why can't an always moving forward branch of Firefox work for you? signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] And then there was one (browser)
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 3:22 AM, Johnny Hughes joh...@centos.org wrote: Why do you need Firefox 27 ... CentOS has the latest ESR version of Firefox (24.3.0) that gets security updates and it will always be the ESR version, so it will always get security updates and always move forward. So, moving forward and supported. http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/organizations/faq/ This firefox should be relevant, do almost everything the new one does, and be supportable within an organization. In fact, Mozilla chose to work with Enterprise Linux groups while Google basically thumbed their noses at the prospect. Why can't an always moving forward branch of Firefox work for you? Oh, I didn't realize Firefox ESR had reached ver 24! I thought it was still at 17. Thanks Johnny. 24 has built-in pdf support and is faster than 17. I'm switching my lab back to the ESR version. Thanks. :) ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] And then there was one (browser)
On Sat, Feb 8, 2014 at 5:41 PM, Johnny Hughes joh...@centos.org wrote: On 02/06/2014 10:41 AM, Phelps, Matt wrote: On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 11:12 AM, Fabian Arrotin fabian.arro...@arrfab.netwrote: On 06/02/14 16:26, Phelps, Matt wrote: On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 12:30 AM, Robert Arkiletian rob...@gmail.com wrote: new potential remote code exploit in Chromium flash. http://googlechromereleases.blogspot.ca/2014/02/stable-channel-update.html Doesn't look like these repos are being updated. http://people.redhat.com/tpopela/rpms/ http://people.centos.org/hughesjr/chromium/6/ Any info on this issue would be welcome. Yes, please. Can the CentOS folks check with their newly minted Red Hat brethren on this issue? This is getting critical for us. We have over a hundred CO6 desktops that are currently running an insecure version of chromium. The security people are all over us on this! We need to run chrome/chromium in order to manage our Google Apps for Government deployment (for over 1000 users). It doesn't work right with firefox. If we need to apply pressure elsewhere, please let us know where to direct our fury. ... to Google ? (especially because it's *their* browser to support *their* Google Apps ) Of course we already have notified Google. I was hoping for a little more granularity. Google is a large place; as is Red Hat I know. There was word that Red Hat was working with Google on a solution, and I was hoping to hear if there was any movement. I can't ask Red Hat since we don't pay for it, but perhaps the new CentOS relationship with them can offer a channel of communication for the Community. Sure, we talked to them (redhat). That does not make the code actually build any faster. The code does not build (as is) on EL6 and each build needs to be troubleshot and error corrected to make it work. Currently there are several pieces not building ... just like there were before. The 31 tree was finally made to build, after several changes, The 32 tree is not building. I like to use chromium as well ... but the only supported browser is Firefox ... that is the one with EL support. Chromium is a best effort to get to build (and it always will be) ... Google has no interest in supporting it, so we are taking the code that they release and working with it until it builds on EL6. Thanks Johnny, The piece of information I was looking for was the bit about Google's attitude towards the situation with respect to chrome (vs. chromium). I, of course, appreciate the efforts on the CentOS end and realize it's not under your control. I was hoping Red Hat dollars would be influential to Google, and was merely looking for any further information on weather Google's chrome would ever work again on RHEL/CentOS 6 again, and if that might be available from you guys, since you now work for them. If there's any way to pass on the need for more pressure on Google, from Red Hat, that would be appreciated. We CentOS users can't do that directly. We chose CentOS long ago for all the right reasons; chiefly that we can't afford 150 RHEL licenses since we're in an academic environment (even with academic rates). The situation is highly frustrating, and we feel powerless. WRT your google apps docs ... OK, so have 2 browsers on your system. Use the chromium for your google apps and firefox for everything else. The point is, we're close to being told to disable chromium and remove it because version 31 is insecure. I told everyone that the chromium support was as can be made to work. If you REALLY need it to work, hire someone to maintain it :) I appreciate the smiley face, but that should not be necessary to make the worlds most popular browser work on the worlds most popular Enterprise Linux distribution (and it's FOSS variants)! -- Matt Phelps System Administrator, Computation Facility Harvard - Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics mphe...@cfa.harvard.edu, http://www.cfa.harvard.edu ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] And then there was one (browser)
On Sat, Feb 8, 2014 at 2:41 PM, Johnny Hughes joh...@centos.org wrote: Sure, we talked to them (redhat). That does not make the code actually build any faster. The code does not build (as is) on EL6 and each build needs to be troubleshot and error corrected to make it work. Currently there are several pieces not building ... just like there were before. The 31 tree was finally made to build, after several changes, The 32 tree is not building. I like to use chromium as well ... but the only supported browser is Firefox ... that is the one with EL support. Chromium is a best effort to get to build (and it always will be) ... Google has no interest in supporting it, so we are taking the code that they release and working with it until it builds on EL6. Thanks for the update Johnny, In the meantime I have requested Remi's repo for Firefox 27. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] And then there was one (browser)
Sorry for this being off topic but I feel it emphasizes the need for long term support for desktop browsers on Linux. Went hunting for any info on Opera for Linux. My assumptions seem to be correct about Opera. I have no proof this is a legit post but it sounds like the truth: At my previous employer, a small browser vendor that decided to abandon its own rendering engine and browser stack, I stopped using our product because Linux wasn't a priority. Numerous reasons were given, such as low market share, only geeks use it, all journalists use Macs, c. This was to the point of ridiculing the platform and the people working on it, frequently citing Linux jokes such as you'll probably have to recompile your kernel first whenever the question was seriously raised about when we'd start at least getting the core libraries working. And when I say it wasn't a priority, I mean that we didn't even have something that was in a compilable state. A few people had started fixing up the broken code to get something that would compile on Linux in their own free time. After a few weeks of hacking, they were told by management to stop what they were doing and instead focus their volunteer efforts on the project goals, being to ship a Windows and Mac version. So the company began the process of forcefully moving developers who'd worked on Linux for over 15 years to platforms they felt uncomfortable and unproductive working on. This is a much longer tale, but it tells the story of a company alienating not only their loyal user base, but also a significant proportion of their own developers. The result? Lack of motivation and resignations. Well done. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7129955 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] And then there was one (browser)
Am 06.02.2014 um 17:41 schrieb Phelps, Matt mphe...@cfa.harvard.edu: On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 11:12 AM, Fabian Arrotin fabian.arro...@arrfab.netwrote: On 06/02/14 16:26, Phelps, Matt wrote: On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 12:30 AM, Robert Arkiletian rob...@gmail.com wrote: http://googlechromereleases.blogspot.ca/2014/02/stable-channel-update.html Yes, please. Can the CentOS folks check with their newly minted Red Hat brethren on this issue? This is getting critical for us. We have over a hundred CO6 desktops that are currently running an insecure version of chromium. The security people are all over us on this! We need to run chrome/chromium in order to manage our Google Apps for Government deployment (for over 1000 users). It doesn't work right with firefox. If we need to apply pressure elsewhere, please let us know where to direct our fury. ... to Google ? (especially because it's *their* browser to support *their* Google Apps ) Of course we already have notified Google. I was hoping for a little more granularity. Google is a large place; as is Red Hat I know. There was word that Red Hat was working with Google on a solution, and I was hoping to hear if there was any movement. I can't ask Red Hat since we don't pay for it, but perhaps the new CentOS relationship with them can offer a channel of communication for the Community. i do not understand, having such infrastructure and not even a subscription. CentOS lives also because professionals pay upstream for their work. -- LF ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] And then there was one (browser)
On Feb 8, 2014 1:41 AM, Lists li...@benjamindsmith.com wrote: On 02/06/2014 08:41 AM, Phelps, Matt wrote: Of course we already have notified Google. I was hoping for a little more granularity. Google is a large place; as is Red Hat I know. There was word that Red Hat was working with Google on a solution, and I was hoping to hear if there was any movement. I can't ask Red Hat since we don't pay for it, but perhaps the new CentOS relationship with them can offer a channel of communication for the Community. I don't mean to poke, but is there a reason you aren't using Chromium? It looks, acts, and works like Google Chrome except that: 1) It doesn't spy on you. 2) It uses standard flash that you install separately. 3) The icon looks a little different. I use Chromium on Fedora, so I can't comment on CentOS, which I only use for headless servers. But this might be a starting point: http://www.if-not-true-then-false.com/2013/install-chromium-on-centos-red-hat-rhel/ Good luck! ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos Chromium 32 won't build with CentOS 6 either. That would be perfectly fine. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] And then there was one (browser)
On 02/06/2014 10:41 AM, Phelps, Matt wrote: On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 11:12 AM, Fabian Arrotin fabian.arro...@arrfab.netwrote: On 06/02/14 16:26, Phelps, Matt wrote: On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 12:30 AM, Robert Arkiletian rob...@gmail.com wrote: new potential remote code exploit in Chromium flash. http://googlechromereleases.blogspot.ca/2014/02/stable-channel-update.html Doesn't look like these repos are being updated. http://people.redhat.com/tpopela/rpms/ http://people.centos.org/hughesjr/chromium/6/ Any info on this issue would be welcome. Yes, please. Can the CentOS folks check with their newly minted Red Hat brethren on this issue? This is getting critical for us. We have over a hundred CO6 desktops that are currently running an insecure version of chromium. The security people are all over us on this! We need to run chrome/chromium in order to manage our Google Apps for Government deployment (for over 1000 users). It doesn't work right with firefox. If we need to apply pressure elsewhere, please let us know where to direct our fury. ... to Google ? (especially because it's *their* browser to support *their* Google Apps ) Of course we already have notified Google. I was hoping for a little more granularity. Google is a large place; as is Red Hat I know. There was word that Red Hat was working with Google on a solution, and I was hoping to hear if there was any movement. I can't ask Red Hat since we don't pay for it, but perhaps the new CentOS relationship with them can offer a channel of communication for the Community. Sure, we talked to them (redhat). That does not make the code actually build any faster. The code does not build (as is) on EL6 and each build needs to be troubleshot and error corrected to make it work. Currently there are several pieces not building ... just like there were before. The 31 tree was finally made to build, after several changes, The 32 tree is not building. I like to use chromium as well ... but the only supported browser is Firefox ... that is the one with EL support. Chromium is a best effort to get to build (and it always will be) ... Google has no interest in supporting it, so we are taking the code that they release and working with it until it builds on EL6. WRT your google apps docs ... OK, so have 2 browsers on your system. Use the chromium for your google apps and firefox for everything else. I told everyone that the chromium support was as can be made to work. If you REALLY need it to work, hire someone to maintain it :) signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] And then there was one (browser)
On 02/06/2014 08:41 AM, Phelps, Matt wrote: Of course we already have notified Google. I was hoping for a little more granularity. Google is a large place; as is Red Hat I know. There was word that Red Hat was working with Google on a solution, and I was hoping to hear if there was any movement. I can't ask Red Hat since we don't pay for it, but perhaps the new CentOS relationship with them can offer a channel of communication for the Community. I don't mean to poke, but is there a reason you aren't using Chromium? It looks, acts, and works like Google Chrome except that: 1) It doesn't spy on you. 2) It uses standard flash that you install separately. 3) The icon looks a little different. I use Chromium on Fedora, so I can't comment on CentOS, which I only use for headless servers. But this might be a starting point: http://www.if-not-true-then-false.com/2013/install-chromium-on-centos-red-hat-rhel/ Good luck! ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] And then there was one (browser)
On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 12:30 AM, Robert Arkiletian rob...@gmail.com wrote: new potential remote code exploit in Chromium flash. http://googlechromereleases.blogspot.ca/2014/02/stable-channel-update.html Doesn't look like these repos are being updated. http://people.redhat.com/tpopela/rpms/ http://people.centos.org/hughesjr/chromium/6/ Any info on this issue would be welcome. Yes, please. Can the CentOS folks check with their newly minted Red Hat brethren on this issue? This is getting critical for us. We have over a hundred CO6 desktops that are currently running an insecure version of chromium. The security people are all over us on this! We need to run chrome/chromium in order to manage our Google Apps for Government deployment (for over 1000 users). It doesn't work right with firefox. If we need to apply pressure elsewhere, please let us know where to direct our fury. -- Matt Phelps System Administrator, Computation Facility Harvard - Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics mphe...@cfa.harvard.edu, http://www.cfa.harvard.edu ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] And then there was one (browser)
On 06/02/14 16:26, Phelps, Matt wrote: On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 12:30 AM, Robert Arkiletian rob...@gmail.com wrote: new potential remote code exploit in Chromium flash. http://googlechromereleases.blogspot.ca/2014/02/stable-channel-update.html Doesn't look like these repos are being updated. http://people.redhat.com/tpopela/rpms/ http://people.centos.org/hughesjr/chromium/6/ Any info on this issue would be welcome. Yes, please. Can the CentOS folks check with their newly minted Red Hat brethren on this issue? This is getting critical for us. We have over a hundred CO6 desktops that are currently running an insecure version of chromium. The security people are all over us on this! We need to run chrome/chromium in order to manage our Google Apps for Government deployment (for over 1000 users). It doesn't work right with firefox. If we need to apply pressure elsewhere, please let us know where to direct our fury. ... to Google ? (especially because it's *their* browser to support *their* Google Apps ) -- Fabian Arrotin gpg key: 56BEC54E | twitter: @arrfab ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] And then there was one (browser)
On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 11:12 AM, Fabian Arrotin fabian.arro...@arrfab.netwrote: On 06/02/14 16:26, Phelps, Matt wrote: On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 12:30 AM, Robert Arkiletian rob...@gmail.com wrote: new potential remote code exploit in Chromium flash. http://googlechromereleases.blogspot.ca/2014/02/stable-channel-update.html Doesn't look like these repos are being updated. http://people.redhat.com/tpopela/rpms/ http://people.centos.org/hughesjr/chromium/6/ Any info on this issue would be welcome. Yes, please. Can the CentOS folks check with their newly minted Red Hat brethren on this issue? This is getting critical for us. We have over a hundred CO6 desktops that are currently running an insecure version of chromium. The security people are all over us on this! We need to run chrome/chromium in order to manage our Google Apps for Government deployment (for over 1000 users). It doesn't work right with firefox. If we need to apply pressure elsewhere, please let us know where to direct our fury. ... to Google ? (especially because it's *their* browser to support *their* Google Apps ) Of course we already have notified Google. I was hoping for a little more granularity. Google is a large place; as is Red Hat I know. There was word that Red Hat was working with Google on a solution, and I was hoping to hear if there was any movement. I can't ask Red Hat since we don't pay for it, but perhaps the new CentOS relationship with them can offer a channel of communication for the Community. -- Matt Phelps System Administrator, Computation Facility Harvard - Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics mphe...@cfa.harvard.edu, http://www.cfa.harvard.edu ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] And then there was one (browser)
new potential remote code exploit in Chromium flash. http://googlechromereleases.blogspot.ca/2014/02/stable-channel-update.html Doesn't look like these repos are being updated. http://people.redhat.com/tpopela/rpms/ http://people.centos.org/hughesjr/chromium/6/ Any info on this issue would be welcome. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] And then there was one (browser)
On Sat, December 21, 2013 16:54, Peter wrote: On 12/22/2013 09:00 AM, Scot P. Floess wrote: as much as I hate to admit it, I'm not sure what mono/moonlight are... Linux implementation of Microsoft .net and Silverlight respectively. Silverlight was supposed to be Microsoft's answer to flash which never really took off except in some high corporate and government situations where some PHB was tricked into it by a Microsoft salesman. Both mono (and as an extension moonlight) are spearheaded by Novel with support from Microsoft, which means it will almost work but not quite. Were spearheaded, not are spearheaded. Novel is long gone from the picture. Presently Mono is a Ximian project (http://www.mono-project.com), which is where it started as far as I can recall. To the best of my knowledge Moonlight recently was resuscitated after having near death experience but, at the moment, is SUSE only as far as Linux support goes. -- *** E-Mail is NOT a SECURE channel *** James B. Byrnemailto:byrn...@harte-lyne.ca Harte Lyne Limited http://www.harte-lyne.ca 9 Brockley Drive vox: +1 905 561 1241 Hamilton, Ontario fax: +1 905 561 0757 Canada L8E 3C3 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] And then there was one (browser)
Well, turns out it was more than a rumour. Here it is, some test version: http://people.redhat.com/tpopela/rpms/ I would recommend trying those RPMs .. I will see if I can get it to build and get it into my chromium soon. FYI chromium-31.0.1650.63-1.el6_5.src.rpm builds (in mock) and installs just fine in C6.5 64-bit. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] And then there was one (browser)
On 20.12.2013 21:14, Akemi Yagi wrote: On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 5:33 AM, Akemi Yagi amy...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 5:48 PM, Robert Arkiletian rob...@gmail.com wrote: Does anyone know of secret plans to eventually support Chrome/Chromium on C6? (crossing fingers) I heard a rumour about such a secret plan (RH talking with Google) but cannot confirm ... Well, turns out it was more than a rumour. Here it is, some test version: http://people.redhat.com/tpopela/rpms/ Thanks! However even this version has serious problems - like the old versions, on multiple monitor setups it will refuse to leave full screen. Stay away from F11! :-) -- Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology! Nux! www.nux.ro ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] And then there was one (browser)
On 12/21/2013 04:14 AM, Александр Кириллов wrote: Well, turns out it was more than a rumour. Here it is, some test version: http://people.redhat.com/tpopela/rpms/ I would recommend trying those RPMs .. I will see if I can get it to build and get it into my chromium soon. FYI chromium-31.0.1650.63-1.el6_5.src.rpm builds (in mock) and installs just fine in C6.5 64-bit. Indeed it does and I have put a version of it built for centos-6 i386 an x86_64 in my testing repo: http://people.centos.org/hughesjr/chromium/6/ I will try to keep this updated (as I did before) when new versions of chromium become available. I was able to rebuild other versions of the 31.x tree for testing a process to keep chromium updated ... however, the current chromium beta tree (32.0.1700.68 right now) fails to build. As always with things in my personal repo ... use at your own risk :) Thanks, Johnny Hughes signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] And then there was one (browser)
Scot P. Floess sfloess@... writes: All, I don't know if this will help y'all, but I have gotten Chrome working with CentOS 6.x: http://www.tecmint.com/install-google-chrome-on-redhat-centos-fedora-linux/ On Fri, 20 Dec 2013, Kwan Lowe wrote: No consolation for CentOS 6, but Chrome does appear to work on the upstream 7 beta. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@... http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos Scot P. Floess RHCT (Certificate Number 605010084735240) Chief Architect FlossWare http://sourceforge.net/projects/flossware http://flossware.sourceforge.net https://github.com/organizations/FlossWare Were you able to get mono/moonlight to work? I'm happy with FF but the local water district re-did their web site to require silverlight. I was able to get Chrome installed and added the moonlight/mono pieces but I end up with a blank page after I login to their web site (couldn't even get the login screen with FF so I guess that's progress). Cheers, Dave ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] And then there was one (browser)
Dave, To be honest, I never tried - as much as I hate to admit it, I'm not sure what mono/moonlight are... But I've had Chrome working for me for at least 6 months if not a year and it works fine (I'm not on CentOS 6.5)... Thanks, Flossy On Sat, 21 Dec 2013, David G. Miller wrote: Scot P. Floess sfloess@... writes: All, I don't know if this will help y'all, but I have gotten Chrome working with CentOS 6.x: http://www.tecmint.com/install-google-chrome-on-redhat-centos-fedora-linux/ On Fri, 20 Dec 2013, Kwan Lowe wrote: No consolation for CentOS 6, but Chrome does appear to work on the upstream 7 beta. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@... http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos Scot P. Floess RHCT (Certificate Number 605010084735240) Chief Architect FlossWare http://sourceforge.net/projects/flossware http://flossware.sourceforge.net https://github.com/organizations/FlossWare Were you able to get mono/moonlight to work? I'm happy with FF but the local water district re-did their web site to require silverlight. I was able to get Chrome installed and added the moonlight/mono pieces but I end up with a blank page after I login to their web site (couldn't even get the login screen with FF so I guess that's progress). Cheers, Dave ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos Scot P. Floess RHCT (Certificate Number 605010084735240) Chief Architect FlossWare http://sourceforge.net/projects/flossware http://flossware.sourceforge.net https://github.com/organizations/FlossWare ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] And then there was one (browser)
I'm using too in these hours, 4-5 hours, no crash, and finally also the site of MVA works with Chrome :) Fabrizio On Sat, Dec 21, 2013 at 9:00 PM, Scot P. Floess sflo...@nc.rr.com wrote: Dave, To be honest, I never tried - as much as I hate to admit it, I'm not sure what mono/moonlight are... But I've had Chrome working for me for at least 6 months if not a year and it works fine (I'm not on CentOS 6.5)... Thanks, Flossy On Sat, 21 Dec 2013, David G. Miller wrote: Scot P. Floess sfloess@... writes: All, I don't know if this will help y'all, but I have gotten Chrome working with CentOS 6.x: http://www.tecmint.com/install-google-chrome-on-redhat-centos-fedora-linux/ On Fri, 20 Dec 2013, Kwan Lowe wrote: No consolation for CentOS 6, but Chrome does appear to work on the upstream 7 beta. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@... http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos Scot P. Floess RHCT (Certificate Number 605010084735240) Chief Architect FlossWare http://sourceforge.net/projects/flossware http://flossware.sourceforge.net https://github.com/organizations/FlossWare Were you able to get mono/moonlight to work? I'm happy with FF but the local water district re-did their web site to require silverlight. I was able to get Chrome installed and added the moonlight/mono pieces but I end up with a blank page after I login to their web site (couldn't even get the login screen with FF so I guess that's progress). Cheers, Dave ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos Scot P. Floess RHCT (Certificate Number 605010084735240) Chief Architect FlossWare http://sourceforge.net/projects/flossware http://flossware.sourceforge.net https://github.com/organizations/FlossWare ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift. (A. Einstein) La mente intuitiva è un dono sacro e la mente razionale è un fedele servo. Noi abbiamo creato una società che onora il servo e ha dimenticato il dono. (A. Einstein) Fabrizio Di Carlo ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] And then there was one (browser)
On 12/22/2013 09:00 AM, Scot P. Floess wrote: as much as I hate to admit it, I'm not sure what mono/moonlight are... Linux implementation of Microsoft .net and Silverlight respectively. Silverlight was supposed to be Microsoft's answer to flash which never really took off except in some high corporate and government situations where some PHB was tricked into it by a Microsoft salesman. Both mono (and as an extension moonlight) are spearheaded by Novel with support from Microsoft, which means it will almost work but not quite. To the GP, I would try rebuilding moonlight with the latest version and see if it helps, and if it doesn't then you may be stuck with either dual-booting or running a VM with windoze in order to access that government website. You may also want to look into laws regarding equal access to government resources in your area. Peter ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] And then there was one (browser)
On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 5:48 PM, Robert Arkiletian rob...@gmail.com wrote: Does anyone know of secret plans to eventually support Chrome/Chromium on C6? (crossing fingers) I heard a rumour about such a secret plan (RH talking with Google) but cannot confirm ... Akemi ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] And then there was one (browser)
No consolation for CentOS 6, but Chrome does appear to work on the upstream 7 beta. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] And then there was one (browser)
All, I don't know if this will help y'all, but I have gotten Chrome working with CentOS 6.x: http://www.tecmint.com/install-google-chrome-on-redhat-centos-fedora-linux/ On Fri, 20 Dec 2013, Kwan Lowe wrote: No consolation for CentOS 6, but Chrome does appear to work on the upstream 7 beta. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos Scot P. Floess RHCT (Certificate Number 605010084735240) Chief Architect FlossWare http://sourceforge.net/projects/flossware http://flossware.sourceforge.net https://github.com/organizations/FlossWare ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] And then there was one (browser)
On 20/12/2013 11:51 PM, Scot P. Floess wrote: All, I don't know if this will help y'all, but I have gotten Chrome working with CentOS 6.x: http://www.tecmint.com/install-google-chrome-on-redhat-centos-fedora-linux/ On Fri, 20 Dec 2013, Kwan Lowe wrote: No consolation for CentOS 6, but Chrome does appear to work on the upstream 7 beta. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos Good. Scot P. Floess RHCT (Certificate Number 605010084735240) Chief Architect FlossWare http://sourceforge.net/projects/flossware http://flossware.sourceforge.net https://github.com/organizations/FlossWare ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] And then there was one (browser)
On 20/12/2013 11:51 PM, Scot P. Floess wrote: All, I don't know if this will help y'all, but I have gotten Chrome working with CentOS 6.x: http://www.tecmint.com/install-google-chrome-on-redhat-centos-fedora-linux/ Not Good! *RL* On Fri, 20 Dec 2013, Kwan Lowe wrote: No consolation for CentOS 6, but Chrome does appear to work on the upstream 7 beta. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos Scot P. Floess RHCT (Certificate Number 605010084735240) Chief Architect FlossWare http://sourceforge.net/projects/flossware http://flossware.sourceforge.net https://github.com/organizations/FlossWare ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] And then there was one (browser)
That script by Richard Lloyd is not a good idea. I think it's using libs from other distros (maybe even EOL distros) . I'd be surprised if that works stable for any length of time. On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 9:51 AM, Scot P. Floess sflo...@nc.rr.com wrote: All, I don't know if this will help y'all, but I have gotten Chrome working with CentOS 6.x: http://www.tecmint.com/install-google-chrome-on-redhat-centos-fedora-linux/ On Fri, 20 Dec 2013, Kwan Lowe wrote: No consolation for CentOS 6, but Chrome does appear to work on the upstream 7 beta. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos Scot P. Floess RHCT (Certificate Number 605010084735240) Chief Architect FlossWare http://sourceforge.net/projects/flossware http://flossware.sourceforge.net https://github.com/organizations/FlossWare ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] And then there was one (browser)
On 12/19/2013 19:50, John R Pierce wrote: On 12/19/2013 6:43 PM, Darr247 wrote: On 20 DEC 2013 @02:06 zulu, John R Pierce wrote: how many XP systems are still in use? We have 3 XP desktops connected to the LAN in our home. that was a rhetorical question, of course I'd expect THIS email list to be skewed heavily away from the global norm. I suspect there's 100 to 1000 XP systems for every RHEL/CentOS desktop workstation on a global basis. Web site browser stats are often misused to talk about OS market share, but in this case, they're perfect. They measure exactly what we want here. One set I looked at[*] says the XP:Linux ratio is about 20:1. Others roughly confirm this. I was unable to find stats that broke the Linux portion down, which is unfortunate because it's difficult to build a browser that runs on all Linuxes out-of-the-box. Netscape used to ship an any Linux tarball, through Netscape 4. To pull that trick off, they had to include copies of *all* of the libraries it was built against except libc, even when the platform came with one or more of these libraries. The lowest-common-denominator result didn't take advantage of any platform-specific desktop features. NS4 looked and worked like CDE/Motif no matter where it ran. Chromium doesn't try to do that. They'd have to dedicate build resources -- test VMs, develoer time -- to each OS they specifically support. They'd then have to choose to either do the sort of LCD effort Netscape did, or spend development time creating workarounds for missing features on the older platforms they want to support. To hit your 100:1 number, John, EL6 would have to be 1/5 the Linux interactive desktop market. I'd be stunned if it is that high, given how popular Ubuntu and Mint are for that. I also agree that 1000:1 seems like the far edge of the probability curve. That would mean EL6 is 1/50 the total interactive desktop Linux market. It could be that bad, given that most EL6 machines are probably headless servers. [*] http://gs.statcounter.com/#desktop-os-ww-monthly-201211-201311 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] And then there was one (browser)
On 12/20/2013 10:47 AM, Warren Young wrote: I also agree that 1000:1 seems like the far edge of the probability curve. That would mean EL6 is 1/50 the total interactive desktop Linux market. It could be that bad, given that most EL6 machines are probably headless servers. the 50 or so dedicated and virtual EL systems I wrangle are all headless. -- john r pierce 37N 122W somewhere on the middle of the left coast ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] And then there was one (browser)
On 2013-12-20 1:24 PM, Robert Arkiletian wrote: That script by Richard Lloyd is not a good idea. I think it's using libs from other distros (maybe even EOL distros) . I'd be surprised if that works stable for any length of time. The script pointed to in the tecmint.com article's the same script I cited in http://www.spinics.net/lists/centos/msg140591.html I used it more than 6 months ago to get Chrome 28 installed in CentOS 6.4, and it's updated with yum from the google repo at least half a dozen times since then to v31.something. Nothing unstable about it. It sequesters the fedora 15 libs away (in /opt/google/chrome/lib if you're looking for them) so only Chrome uses them. After that script installs Chrome, if you run $ strings /usr/lib64/libstdc++.so.6 | grep GLIBC the newest versions found will still be GLIBCXX_3.4.13 and GLIBC_2.4 (just like it should on your current CentOS 6.5 machine) but if you run $ strings /opt/google/chrome/lib/libstdc++.so.6 | grep GLIBC then it will find the newer libs grabbed from the f15 repo. CentOS 6.x is based on kernels circa fedora 14 if you want to talk about EOL distros. :) While the current Chrome works in the upstream beta, the same thing could/will happen again if/when it moves to more-secure updated libs during 7's lifespan. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] And then there was one (browser)
On 12/20/2013 11:12 AM, Darr247 wrote: CentOS 6.x is based on kernels circa fedora 14 if you want to talk about EOL distros. :) With the difference being that while RHEL/Centos have bugs and security fixes applied, Fedora is left dead in the water from the day it's EOLd. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] And then there was one (browser)
On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 12:53 PM, John R Pierce pie...@hogranch.com wrote: On 12/20/2013 10:47 AM, Warren Young wrote: I also agree that 1000:1 seems like the far edge of the probability curve. That would mean EL6 is 1/50 the total interactive desktop Linux market. It could be that bad, given that most EL6 machines are probably headless servers. the 50 or so dedicated and virtual EL systems I wrangle are all headless. I generally run the NX client remotely from a windows or mac when I want something resembling a Centos desktop. But I nearly always use the windows/mac browser - along with some other desktop apps instead of the outdated Centos versions. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] And then there was one (browser)
On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 5:33 AM, Akemi Yagi amy...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 5:48 PM, Robert Arkiletian rob...@gmail.com wrote: Does anyone know of secret plans to eventually support Chrome/Chromium on C6? (crossing fingers) I heard a rumour about such a secret plan (RH talking with Google) but cannot confirm ... Well, turns out it was more than a rumour. Here it is, some test version: http://people.redhat.com/tpopela/rpms/ Akemi ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] And then there was one (browser)
On 12/20/2013 03:14 PM, Akemi Yagi wrote: On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 5:33 AM, Akemi Yagi amy...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 5:48 PM, Robert Arkiletian rob...@gmail.com wrote: Does anyone know of secret plans to eventually support Chrome/Chromium on C6? (crossing fingers) I heard a rumour about such a secret plan (RH talking with Google) but cannot confirm ... Well, turns out it was more than a rumour. Here it is, some test version: http://people.redhat.com/tpopela/rpms/ I would recommend trying those RPMs .. I will see if I can get it to build and get it into my chromium soon. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] And then there was one (browser)
Am 20.12.2013 um 22:14 schrieb Akemi Yagi amy...@gmail.com: On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 5:33 AM, Akemi Yagi amy...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 5:48 PM, Robert Arkiletian rob...@gmail.com wrote: Does anyone know of secret plans to eventually support Chrome/Chromium on C6? (crossing fingers) I heard a rumour about such a secret plan (RH talking with Google) but cannot confirm ... Well, turns out it was more than a rumour. Here it is, some test version: http://people.redhat.com/tpopela/rpms/ Awesome! -- LF ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] And then there was one (browser)
About 6 months has passed since the last working version of Opera (12.16) for Linux was released. Opera 18 (Win+Mac only) is now based on Chromium so I'm not holding my breath for it to work with C6 even if it is ever released. Chrome/Chromium is pretty much history too (libs too old). So Firefox is the only game in town. Even lesser knowns like Midori won't work either. Considering the amount of time left in the C6 support cycle, one would have thought TUV would have worked with Google to find a solution but I haven't heard a peep. How can XP, an ancient OS going EOL in a few months, still be supported for the latest Chromium but C6 not? Does anyone know of secret plans to eventually support Chrome/Chromium on C6? (crossing fingers) ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] And then there was one (browser)
On 12/19/2013 5:48 PM, Robert Arkiletian wrote: How can XP, an ancient OS going EOL in a few months, still be supported for the latest Chromium but C6 not? how many XP systems are still in use? how many people use C6 as a desktop? also, Microsoft has done a remarkable version of maintaining BINARY compatibility across many versions, something Linux has traditionally eschewed. -- john r pierce 37N 122W somewhere on the middle of the left coast ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] And then there was one (browser)
On 20 DEC 2013 @02:06 zulu, John R Pierce wrote: how many XP systems are still in use? We have 3 XP desktops connected to the LAN in our home. We also have 3 Win7 laptops. I used to dual-boot fedora on one of the laptops, until windows refused to apply SP1 because of grub's alterations to the MBR... it was happy to install with Dell's MBR, though (which starts up their customized version of CyberLink's PowerCinema, called MediaDirect) when an alternate 'On' button is used). how many people use C6 as a desktop? I have 2 (it's not that I *hate* GNOME3 as much as I'm waiting for as many bugs as possible to be worked out before I'm forced to give up something that works fine and use something that, well... doesn't; preferably one in which alacarte is functional and actually edits/saves the GNOME3 menus). I also have used the script from http://chrome.richardlloyd.org.uk/ to install google's Chrome repo and Chrome 28+ (up to version 31.something now) on both those C6 machines, and am completely happy with the way it sequesters the updated libs (grabbed from a fedora 15 archive repo) from the 'stock' libs so only Chrome accesses and uses them. Melly xmas. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] And then there was one (browser)
On 12/19/2013 6:43 PM, Darr247 wrote: On 20 DEC 2013 @02:06 zulu, John R Pierce wrote: how many XP systems are still in use? We have 3 XP desktops connected to the LAN in our home. that was a rhetorical question, of course I'd expect THIS email list to be skewed heavily away from the global norm. I suspect there's 100 to 1000 XP systems for every RHEL/CentOS desktop workstation on a global basis. -- john r pierce 37N 122W somewhere on the middle of the left coast ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
