Never mind.
http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=12754
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 1:04 AM, Bryan Vyhmeister
wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 3, 2010 at 4:18 PM, Brandon Mercer
> wrote:
>> Have you guys also seen chrome take forever or just not resolve stuff?
>
> I am having this exact issue runn
On Sat, Apr 3, 2010 at 4:18 PM, Brandon Mercer
wrote:
> Have you guys also seen chrome take forever or just not resolve stuff?
I am having this exact issue running the latest chromium pkg on i386
-current from May 27. Was there any resolution to this?
Bryan
On Sat, Apr 3, 2010 at 3:10 PM, frantisek holop wrote:
> hmm, on Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 08:07:41PM -0700, Peter Valchev said that
>> After a long battle with various issues that cropped up, and thanks to
>> huge help from the guy working on the FreeBSD port (linked from my
>> page), I have an update
hmm, on Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 08:07:41PM -0700, Peter Valchev said that
> After a long battle with various issues that cropped up, and thanks to
> huge help from the guy working on the FreeBSD port (linked from my
> page), I have an update to chromium-5.0.539.0
thanks for the pacakge/port.
2 issue
>>
>> Well it's instant on my desktop machine.
>> Will fidle with it a bit.
>
> Eeepcs usually have a slow ssd for user files (depending on how you
> configured the partitions). It may be that chrome is touching/reading
> a lot of stuff to load the options pane.
>
> But I haven't looked into it so
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 10:42 AM, Auclair Vincent
wrote:
>>> Tested on an i386 eeepc.
>>> Works fine, some quirks when moving a tab : a square that is not drawn
>>> back until I drop the tab. (it follows the cursor)
>>
>> Hmm, actually tab dragging is totally busted with fvwm2, I just
>> noticed -
2010/4/1 Auclair Vincent :
>>> Tested on an i386 eeepc.
>>> Works fine, some quirks when moving a tab : a square that is not drawn
>>> back until I drop the tab. (it follows the cursor)
>>
>> Hmm, actually tab dragging is totally busted with fvwm2, I just
>> noticed - it always pops it out. So I im
>> Tested on an i386 eeepc.
>> Works fine, some quirks when moving a tab : a square that is not drawn
>> back until I drop the tab. (it follows the cursor)
>
> Hmm, actually tab dragging is totally busted with fvwm2, I just
> noticed - it always pops it out. So I imagine this is window manager
> sp
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 8:47 AM, Auclair Vincent
wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 5:24 PM, Peter Valchev wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 11:50 PM, Antoine Jacoutot
>> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 31 Mar 2010, Peter Valchev wrote:
>>>
After a long battle with various issues that cropped up, and thanks
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 5:24 PM, Peter Valchev wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 11:50 PM, Antoine Jacoutot
> wrote:
>> On Wed, 31 Mar 2010, Peter Valchev wrote:
>>
>>> After a long battle with various issues that cropped up, and thanks to
>>> huge help from the guy working on the FreeBSD port (lin
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 11:50 PM, Antoine Jacoutot
wrote:
> On Wed, 31 Mar 2010, Peter Valchev wrote:
>
>> After a long battle with various issues that cropped up, and thanks to
>> huge help from the guy working on the FreeBSD port (linked from my
>> page), I have an update to chromium-5.0.539.0
>
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 9:51 PM, Antti Harri wrote:
> Great to have an updated build, but I guess this is still
> true:
>
> "This package currently requires a CPU supporting SSE2.
> You can check this with: dmesg | grep 'cpu.*SSE2'"
Yeah. I'm sure it's possible to get it working on non-sse2, ther
On Wed, 31 Mar 2010, Peter Valchev wrote:
> After a long battle with various issues that cropped up, and thanks to
> huge help from the guy working on the FreeBSD port (linked from my
> page), I have an update to chromium-5.0.539.0
>
> 4.7ish packages for i386 & amd64 are available here:
> http:/
Hi!
Great to have an updated build, but I guess this is still
true:
"This package currently requires a CPU supporting SSE2.
You can check this with: dmesg | grep 'cpu.*SSE2'"
The i386 binary pkg installs and runs fine on my laptop.
--
Antti Harri
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 9:16 PM, joshua stein wrote:
>> I'd appreciate tests on amd64, especially, as I don't have one locally
>> - I tested that it starts up and renders google.com, but anything more
>> is too much of a pain over ssh X forwarding :-) I know the old port
>> had V8 issues on amd64,
> I'd appreciate tests on amd64, especially, as I don't have one locally
> - I tested that it starts up and renders google.com, but anything more
> is too much of a pain over ssh X forwarding :-) I know the old port
> had V8 issues on amd64, so curious if this works better.
binary package working
After a long battle with various issues that cropped up, and thanks to
huge help from the guy working on the FreeBSD port (linked from my
page), I have an update to chromium-5.0.539.0
4.7ish packages for i386 & amd64 are available here:
http://sightly.net/peter/openbsd/chromium/
As well as the po
On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 9:06 PM, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> On 2010/01/25 20:26, Benoit Chesneau wrote:
>> OpenBSD pollen.nymphormation.org 4.6 GENERIC.MP#69 amd64
>
> , curious yellow...
> (ha, now I have several books to re-read :-)
>
> jeff noon++
>
>
yes also nymphormation is an awesome boo
On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 10:44 PM, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> On 2010/01/25 22:18, Antti Harri wrote:
>>
>> I think the port should be marked as BROKEN as it requires cpu
>> instructions that for example none of my desktops have (all older
>> i386, athlon or similar). The best so far has been that i
On Mon, 25 Jan 2010, Marco Peereboom wrote:
> Not amd64...
Aren't you aware? amd64 sucks!
--
Antoine
Not amd64...
On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 09:44:47PM +, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> On 2010/01/25 22:18, Antti Harri wrote:
> >
> > I think the port should be marked as BROKEN as it requires cpu
> > instructions that for example none of my desktops have (all older
> > i386, athlon or similar). The b
On 2010/01/25 22:18, Antti Harri wrote:
>
> I think the port should be marked as BROKEN as it requires cpu
> instructions that for example none of my desktops have (all older
> i386, athlon or similar). The best so far has been that it attempted
> to start but crashed horribly right after some ini
I agree. Them amd64 port doesn't work at all. i386 sometimes works but
is very crashy.
On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 10:18:44PM +0200, Antti Harri wrote:
>
> I think the port should be marked as BROKEN as it requires cpu
> instructions that for example none of my desktops have (all older i386,
> a
On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 10:18:44PM +0200, Antti Harri wrote:
>
> I think the port should be marked as BROKEN as it requires cpu
> instructions that for example none of my desktops have (all older
> i386, athlon or similar). The best so far has been that it attempted
> to start but crashed horribly
I think the port should be marked as BROKEN as it requires cpu
instructions that for example none of my desktops have (all older i386,
athlon or similar). The best so far has been that it attempted to start
but crashed horribly right after some initial dialog window.
I tried a patch from Ubu
On 2010/01/25 20:26, Benoit Chesneau wrote:
> OpenBSD pollen.nymphormation.org 4.6 GENERIC.MP#69 amd64
, curious yellow...
(ha, now I have several books to re-read :-)
jeff noon++
> I always get this error on websites using javascript:
>
> V8 error: Error initializing V8 (v8::V8::AddMessag
On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 8:26 PM, Benoit Chesneau wrote:
> Chromium don't work on my machine :
>
> hw.machine=amd64
> hw.model=Pentium(R) Dual-Core CPU E5300 @ 2.60GHz
> hw.ncpu=2
>
> OpenBSD pollen.nymphormation.org 4.6 GENERIC.MP#69 amd64
>
>
> I always get this error on websites using javascript
Chromium don't work on my machine :
hw.machine=amd64
hw.model=Pentium(R) Dual-Core CPU E5300 @ 2.60GHz
hw.ncpu=2
OpenBSD pollen.nymphormation.org 4.6 GENERIC.MP#69 amd64
I always get this error on websites using javascript:
V8 error: Error initializing V8 (v8::V8::AddMessageListener())
So I t
It only proves he works for the dark overlords.
On Wed, Dec 09, 2009 at 01:22:25PM +1100, Damien Miller wrote:
> On Wed, 9 Dec 2009, Andrej Elizarov wrote:
>
> > Just wonder, does anyone know about Chromium browser port for openbsd?
> > I had tried it on Windows box and seems it's much faster tha
On Wed, 9 Dec 2009, Andrej Elizarov wrote:
> Just wonder, does anyone know about Chromium browser port for openbsd?
> I had tried it on Windows box and seems it's much faster than FF (in fact,
> not Chromium - Chrome based on sources' one).
> And google sad that it's ported on freebsd and there
Just wonder, does anyone know about Chromium browser port for openbsd?
I had tried it on Windows box and seems it's much faster than FF (in fact,
not Chromium - Chrome based on sources' one).
And google sad that it's ported on freebsd and there floating around patches
specially for openbsd
( like t
31 matches
Mail list logo
