❦ 7 December 2021 23:35 GMT, Simon McVittie:
> I believe what Vincent meant is that the generic non-Flatpak binaries
> provided by the "Ungoogled Chromium" project are compiled on unknown
> machines and require trusting their submitters, whereas the Flatpak
> binaries provided by Flathub are com
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Anthony Fok
* Package name: golang-github-charmbracelet-lipgloss
Version : 0.4.0-1
Upstream Author : Charm
* URL : https://github.com/charmbracelet/lipgloss
* License : Expat
Programming Lang: Go
Description : sty
On Tue, 2021-12-07 at 23:35 +, Simon McVittie wrote:
> Flathub generally requires builds to be done on Flathub's
> infrastructure, from source code if possible, in the same way Debian
> generally requires builds to be done on buildds, from source if
> possible.
Are you sure about that? Is there
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Anthony Fok
* Package name: golang-github-muesli-ansi
Version : 0.0~git20211031.c9f0611-1
Upstream Author : Christian Muehlhaeuser
* URL : https://github.com/muesli/ansi
* License : Expat
Programming Lang: Go
Descript
On Tue, 07 Dec 2021 at 23:08:41 +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 07, 2021 at 10:45:27PM +0100, Vincent Bernat wrote:
> > Flatpak compiles it
> > from source (while UngoogledChromium let contributors compile it and
> > publish the binary because GitHub CI does not allow such resource-heavy
On Tue, Dec 07, 2021 at 10:45:27PM +0100, Vincent Bernat wrote:
> Same here. And they are now following security updates closely (in the
> past, there could lag two or three weeks behind). Flatpak compiles it
> from source (while UngoogledChromium let contributors compile it and
> publish the binar
❦ 7 December 2021 21:46 +01, Mathias Behrle:
>> (I have been running an ungoogled-chromium for a while (ca. a year
>> ago?), however at that time their chrome wasn't extremely stable so I
>> gave up again. Does anybody have experience using it recently?)
>
> (Using chromium only as fallback br
* Tomas Pospisek: " ungoogled-chromium? [was: Re: Bug#995212: chromium: Update
to version 94.0.4606.61 (security-fixes)]" (Tue, 7 Dec 2021 19:43:10 +0100):
> (I have been running an ungoogled-chromium for a while (ca. a year
> ago?), however at that time their chrome wasn't extremely stable so
On Tue, Dec 07, 2021 at 07:31:09PM +0100, Tomas Pospisek wrote:
> > Obviously I cannot promise anything here; I'm currently even more in the
> > dark
> > than you. :-) But if there's a list of relevant bugs somewhere, I at least
> > have a place to try to understand the issues at hand.
The one bu
On 06.12.21 20:43, Noah Meyerhans wrote:
On Sun, Dec 05, 2021 at 07:58:17PM +0300, Dmitry Alexandrov wrote:
So what's happening with chromium in both sid and stable? I saw on d-release
that it was removed from testing (#998676 and #998732), with a discussion
about ending security support for
On 07.12.21 19:14, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
On Tue, Dec 07, 2021 at 07:05:29PM +0100, Tomas Pospisek wrote:
So you being a DD and soon at work on Chromium the hope was that maybe you
could conduct some of upstream love to care about the world outside of
Google (?), here in particular Debian's
On Sat, Dec 4, 2021 at 3:34 AM Paul Wise wrote:
>
> Repology gets you mappings for all the source packages in Debian in one
> download (assuming it has an export of the mappings, that may need to
> be added), while the Anitya mapping requires a human to manually add a
> mapping for each of the tho
On Tue, Dec 07, 2021 at 07:05:29PM +0100, Tomas Pospisek wrote:
> So you being a DD and soon at work on Chromium the hope was that maybe you
> could conduct some of upstream love to care about the world outside of
> Google (?), here in particular Debian's effort to provide Chromium to its
> users..
Hi Steinar,
On 07.12.21 10:07, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
On Tue, Dec 07, 2021 at 08:55:00AM +0100, Tomas Pospisek wrote:
I note that Steinar Gunderson [1] is now employed by Google to work on
Chrome, so maybe there could be hope talking to him?
It's right that I'm just joining the Chromium
On Sat, Dec 04, 2021 at 02:43:56AM +, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> I think that there's a security consideration associated with all these
> proposals for externalizing finding upstream updates. Currently watch files
> and at least the redirectors I know of all run on Debian infrastructure or on
>
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Joao Eriberto Mota Filho
X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org, exel...@hotmail.com
* Package name: obs-downstream-keyer
Version : 0.2.1
Upstream Author : Exeldro
* URL :
https://obsproject.com/forum/resources/downstream-
On Tue, Dec 07, 2021 at 08:55:00AM +0100, Tomas Pospisek wrote:
> I note that Steinar Gunderson [1] is now employed by Google to work on
> Chrome, so maybe there could be hope talking to him?
Hi,
It's right that I'm just joining the Chromium team, although probably not in
an area that is interest
Noah Meyerhans wrote:
> The biggest difficulty, as far as I can tell from my look at Chromium from
> several months ago, is that our patch set [1] needs a lot of attention with
> every chromium release.
And let me ask another silly question: where can we actually see a CI log for a
failed buil
Noah Meyerhans wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 05, 2021 at 07:58:17PM +0300, Dmitry Alexandrov wrote:
>> >> So what's happening with chromium in both sid and stable? I saw on
>> >> d-release that it was removed from testing (#998676 and #998732), with a
>> >> discussion about ending security support for i
19 matches
Mail list logo
