Adam Young | 25 Mar 01:28 2011
Picon

google-chrome

So I awoke from my away time from the internet to discover google-chrome in extra, nearly the same SlackBuild we have been using for some time. There was also the addition of obviously needed dependencies that are not included in stock slackware, which Pat has generously provided in the chrome directory in /extra. 


I personally am a developer channel user, which for those unfamiliar is the next cycle development for chrome. The problem here is that in chrome 11.x PAM is now a dependency. Fortunately it doesn't need to be system wide, and as such I have attached a modified version of the SlackBuild now available in current, with the changes I have made to make my dev channel version work.

Static building of the PAM lib is not the most elegant solution, but until upstream adds a switch ignore the need for PAM it would appear to be the only real solution. The main reason I bring this up, is because the move to chrome 11 code in chrome stable looms on the horizon, and will break the /extra SlackBuild.

Pat, chrome slackbuild maintainers, and/or sbo admins feel free to use/modify as they see fit.

Regards,

atyoung
Attachment (google-chrome.SlackBuild): application/octet-stream, 7440 bytes
<div>
<p>So I awoke from my away time from the internet to discover google-chrome in extra, nearly the same SlackBuild we have been using for some time. There was also the addition of obviously needed dependencies that are not included in stock slackware, which Pat has generously provided in the chrome directory in /extra.&nbsp;</p>
<div>

<br>
</div>
<div>I personally am a developer channel user, which for those&nbsp;unfamiliar&nbsp;is the next cycle development for chrome. The problem here is that in chrome 11.x PAM is now a dependency.&nbsp;Fortunately&nbsp;it doesn't need to be system wide, and as such I have attached a modified version of the SlackBuild now available in current, with the changes I have made to make my dev channel version work.</div>

<div><br></div>
<div>Static building of the PAM lib is not the most elegant solution, but until upstream adds a switch ignore the need for PAM it would appear to be the only real solution. The main reason I bring this up, is because the move to chrome 11 code in chrome stable looms on the horizon, and will break the /extra SlackBuild.</div>

<div><br></div>
<div>Pat, chrome slackbuild maintainers, and/or sbo admins feel free to use/modify as they see fit.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>Regards,</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>atyoung</div>
</div>
Yucatan "Kenjiro" Costa | 25 Mar 04:42 2011
Picon

Re: google-chrome

Interesting...


Why would we possibly have a PAM dependent software in extra when we can have one that doensn't depend on it? I am not here to say  PAM is worthless or not. But since Slackware tradition is not to use PAM... ;)

Not to mention we can have google-chrome/chromium running without the need of some other dependencies like Orbit2 or Gconf.

And...are we already rid of that 'jpeg upload' bug on this version of google-chrome?

Please, I am not bashing the good work you guys (Adam, Erik and Patrick) have done so far. I know you guys do what can be done and I aplaud you for that.



On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 9:28 PM, Adam Young <atyrelyoung-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
So I awoke from my away time from the internet to discover google-chrome in extra, nearly the same SlackBuild we have been using for some time. There was also the addition of obviously needed dependencies that are not included in stock slackware, which Pat has generously provided in the chrome directory in /extra. 

I personally am a developer channel user, which for those unfamiliar is the next cycle development for chrome. The problem here is that in chrome 11.x PAM is now a dependency. Fortunately it doesn't need to be system wide, and as such I have attached a modified version of the SlackBuild now available in current, with the changes I have made to make my dev channel version work.

Static building of the PAM lib is not the most elegant solution, but until upstream adds a switch ignore the need for PAM it would appear to be the only real solution. The main reason I bring this up, is because the move to chrome 11 code in chrome stable looms on the horizon, and will break the /extra SlackBuild.

Pat, chrome slackbuild maintainers, and/or sbo admins feel free to use/modify as they see fit.

Regards,

atyoung

_______________________________________________
SlackBuilds-users mailing list
SlackBuilds-users <at> slackbuilds.org
http://lists.slackbuilds.org/mailman/listinfo/slackbuilds-users
Archives - http://lists.slackbuilds.org/pipermail/slackbuilds-users/
FAQ - http://slackbuilds.org/faq/





--
May the Force be with you!

Yucatan "Kenjiro" Costa

<div>
<p>Interesting...</p>
<div><br></div>
<div>Why would we possibly have a PAM dependent software in extra when we can have one that doensn't depend on it? I am not here to say &nbsp;PAM is worthless or not. But since Slackware tradition is not to use PAM... ;)</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>Not to mention we can have google-chrome/chromium running without the need of some other dependencies like Orbit2 or Gconf.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>And...are we already rid of that 'jpeg upload' bug on this version of google-chrome?</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>Please, I am not bashing the good work you guys (Adam, Erik and Patrick) have done so far. I know you guys do what can be done and I aplaud you for that.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 9:28 PM, Adam Young <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:atyrelyoung@...">atyrelyoung@...</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote">
So I awoke from my away time from the internet to discover google-chrome in extra, nearly the same SlackBuild we have been using for some time. There was also the addition of obviously needed dependencies that are not included in stock slackware, which Pat has generously provided in the chrome directory in /extra.&nbsp;<div>

<br>
</div>
<div>I personally am a developer channel user, which for those&nbsp;unfamiliar&nbsp;is the next cycle development for chrome. The problem here is that in chrome 11.x PAM is now a dependency.&nbsp;Fortunately&nbsp;it doesn't need to be system wide, and as such I have attached a modified version of the SlackBuild now available in current, with the changes I have made to make my dev channel version work.</div>

<div><br></div>
<div>Static building of the PAM lib is not the most elegant solution, but until upstream adds a switch ignore the need for PAM it would appear to be the only real solution. The main reason I bring this up, is because the move to chrome 11 code in chrome stable looms on the horizon, and will break the /extra SlackBuild.</div>

<div><br></div>
<div>Pat, chrome slackbuild maintainers, and/or sbo admins feel free to use/modify as they see fit.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>Regards,</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>atyoung</div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
SlackBuilds-users mailing list<br><a href="mailto:SlackBuilds-users@...">SlackBuilds-users <at> slackbuilds.org</a><br><a href="http://lists.slackbuilds.org/mailman/listinfo/slackbuilds-users" target="_blank">http://lists.slackbuilds.org/mailman/listinfo/slackbuilds-users</a><br>
Archives - <a href="http://lists.slackbuilds.org/pipermail/slackbuilds-users/" target="_blank">http://lists.slackbuilds.org/pipermail/slackbuilds-users/</a><br>
FAQ - <a href="http://slackbuilds.org/faq/" target="_blank">http://slackbuilds.org/faq/</a><br><br><br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>May the Force be with you!<div><br></div>
<div>Yucatan "Kenjiro" Costa</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
Erik Hanson | 25 Mar 04:56 2011

Re: google-chrome

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 00:42:45 -0300
"Yucatan \"Kenjiro\" Costa" <jedi.kenjiro@...> wrote:

> Not to mention we can have google-chrome/chromium running without the
> need of some other dependencies like Orbit2 or Gconf.

Repackaging the debian binary will continue to require these, and
eventually will require PAM as well. I confirmed this recently by
trying the unstable channel, at the time was 11.0. The only answer I
can really think of here is to include some sort of pam-solibs type
package along with ORBit2/GConf. This is not a task I wish to
undertake, however. These days I simply compile chromium using your
script. :)

-- 
Erik Hanson
On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 00:42:45 -0300
"Yucatan \"Kenjiro\" Costa" <jedi.kenjiro@...> wrote:

> Not to mention we can have google-chrome/chromium running without the
> need of some other dependencies like Orbit2 or Gconf.

Repackaging the debian binary will continue to require these, and
eventually will require PAM as well. I confirmed this recently by
trying the unstable channel, at the time was 11.0. The only answer I
can really think of here is to include some sort of pam-solibs type
package along with ORBit2/GConf. This is not a task I wish to
undertake, however. These days I simply compile chromium using your
script. :)

--

-- 
Erik Hanson
Grissiom | 25 Mar 06:36 2011
Picon

Re: google-chrome

On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 11:56 AM, Erik Hanson <erik@...> wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 00:42:45 -0300
> "Yucatan \"Kenjiro\" Costa" <jedi.kenjiro@...> wrote:
>
>> Not to mention we can have google-chrome/chromium running without the
>> need of some other dependencies like Orbit2 or Gconf.
>
> Repackaging the debian binary will continue to require these, and
> eventually will require PAM as well.

Yes, I think it will happen sooner or later.

> I confirmed this recently by trying the unstable channel, at the time was 11.0. The only answer I
> can really think of here is to include some sort of pam-solibs type
> package along with ORBit2/GConf. This is not a task I wish to
> undertake, however. These days I simply compile chromium using your
> script. :)
>

I think Slackware may include a fully functional PAM in the next
release after 13.37(may be 14 or 14.xx?). As time goes by, PAM is more
and more mature and is not the one years ago. Lots of distro have PAM
and it is well tested in some degree. If we have PAM, building KDE
might be easier too.

--

-- 
Cheers,
Grissiom
Matthew Fillpot | 25 Mar 07:01 2011
Picon

Re: google-chrome

On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 1:36 AM, Grissiom <chaos.proton@...> wrote:
> I think Slackware may include a fully functional PAM in the next
> release after 13.37(may be 14 or 14.xx?). As time goes by, PAM is more
> and more mature and is not the one years ago. Lots of distro have PAM
> and it is well tested in some degree. If we have PAM, building KDE
> might be easier too.

I was thinking the same thing, that based upon the recent history it
may be a good time to consider including PAM and potentially selinux.
I am planning to build a collection of slackbuild scripts after the
release of 13.37 to attempt to get PAM and selinux working on a fresh
build, hopefully that information can be used to test for future
possible inclusions.
Patrick J. Volkerding | 25 Mar 07:29 2011

Re: google-chrome

On 03/25/2011 01:01 AM, Matthew Fillpot wrote:
> I was thinking the same thing, that based upon the recent history it
> may be a good time to consider including PAM and potentially selinux.
> I am planning to build a collection of slackbuild scripts after the
> release of 13.37 to attempt to get PAM and selinux working on a fresh
> build, hopefully that information can be used to test for future
> possible inclusions.

It may be a good time to consider PAM sometime after this release, but 
it's almost never a good time for selinux.

Pat
Willy Sudiarto Raharjo | 25 Mar 07:49 2011
Picon

Re: google-chrome

> It may be a good time to consider PAM sometime after this release, but it's
> almost never a good time for selinux.

I agree...
most application must be tweaked in order to work with SELinux

--

-- 
Willy Sudiarto Raharjo
Personal Blog : http://willysr.blogspot.com
Linux Blog: http://slackblogs.blogspot.com
Matthew Fillpot | 25 Mar 08:24 2011
Picon

Re: google-chrome

On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 2:49 AM, Willy Sudiarto Raharjo
<willysr@...> wrote:
>> It may be a good time to consider PAM sometime after this release, but it's
>> almost never a good time for selinux.
>
> I agree...
> most application must be tweaked in order to work with SELinux

I can see your point, SELinux does add some painful complexity that
does not correspond with the simplicity of Slackware.
However I will separate my efforts into two parts, adding full PAM
support and then adding SELlinux on top of PAM, both actions will be
performed for me to better understand the core libraries and necessary
modifications. The two actions will be separated in my scripts so that
the information is available for anyone who wishes to undertake the
same painful processes. I don't expect my actions to lead back to the
official Slackware or Slackbuilds projects due to the need to modify
official packages, however I always welcome others to expand upon my
work to fulfill their needs. Now I only need to wait for the official
release or 13.37 before I begin my project.

Back to the subject, the potential inclusion of PAM support on future
releases will definitely assist to simplify building of google-chome
and other applications, including using alternate authentication
functions which correspond to my personal uses and goals. Thank you
all for considering this option.

--

-- 
-Thank You,
-Matthew Fillpot
TuxaneMedia | 25 Mar 09:26 2011

Re: google-chrome

Am 25.03.2011 07:29, schrieb Patrick J. Volkerding:
but it's almost never a good time for selinux.
I agree absolutely, I wouldn't like Selinux to go into Slackware. I can live perfectly without it
<div>
    Am 25.03.2011 07:29, schrieb Patrick J. Volkerding:
    <blockquote cite="mid:4D8C3641.5010108@..." type="cite">but
      it's almost never a good time for selinux.
    </blockquote>
    I agree absolutely, I wouldn't like Selinux to go into Slackware.
    I can live perfectly without it
  </div>
Chris Abela | 25 Mar 13:23 2011

Re: google-chrome

 

It may be a good time to consider PAM sometime after this release, but

it's almost never a good time for selinux.

 

Pat

 

I needed to re-built open-ldap and samba against PAM, and so I had written my own SlackBuild. Someone might find the attachment useful, even if it was straight-forward.

 

Chris

Attachment (Linux-PAM.tar.gz): application/x-gzip, 4045 bytes
<div>

<div class="Section1">

<p class="MsoPlainText"><span><p>&nbsp;</p></span></p>

<p class="MsoPlainText"><span>It may be a good time to consider PAM sometime after this release, but <p></p></span></p>

<p class="MsoPlainText"><span>it's almost never a good time for selinux.<p></p></span></p>

<p class="MsoPlainText"><span><p>&nbsp;</p></span></p>

<p class="MsoPlainText"><span>Pat<p></p></span></p>

<p class="MsoPlainText"><span><p>&nbsp;</p></span></p>

<p class="MsoPlainText"><span>I needed to re-built open-ldap and samba
against PAM, and so I had written my own SlackBuild. Someone might find the
attachment useful, even if it was straight-forward. <p></p></span></p>

<p class="MsoPlainText"><span><p>&nbsp;</p></span></p>

<p class="MsoPlainText"><span>Chris<p></p></span></p>

</div>

</div>
Felix Pfeifer | 25 Mar 13:48 2011

Re: google-chrome

Voice of a user: ^^
My choice for Slackware was because it doesn't
use PAM or selinux. There are a lot of distros using
it and if i wanted PAM or selinux i would use these
distros, like Fedora which also has 32bit compat
packages for the 64bit version. However - i use
Slackware.
Didier Spaier | 25 Mar 14:30 2011
Picon

Re: google-chrome

Le 25/03/2011 13:48, Felix Pfeifer a écrit :
> Voice of a user: ^^
> My choice for Slackware was because it doesn't
> use PAM or selinux. There are a lot of distros using
> it and if i wanted PAM or selinux i would use these
> distros, like Fedora which also has 32bit compat
> packages for the 64bit version. However - i use
> Slackware.

Voice of another user: ^^

Well, at present PAM would be of no use to me, aside being able to use my Thinkpad's fingerprint reader, which
I consider a somehow cosmetic issue.

But I would not object it to be shipped with Slackware, provided I can choose to enable/disable it, e.g.
chmod (+||-)x /etc/rc.d/rc.PAM.

I would not object either google-chrome being built --without-pam if possible, nor built with PAM
statically linked if possible.

Though "comparaison n'est pas raison" I am happy with Eric's package for VLC wich include all needed dependencies.

Didier

Erik Hanson | 25 Mar 15:21 2011

Re: google-chrome

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 14:30:16 +0100
Didier Spaier <didier.spaier@...> wrote:

> I would not object either google-chrome being built --without-pam if
> possible, nor built with PAM statically linked if possible.

The SlackBuild does not build google-chrome, it repackages a binary
that Google builds, and they are unlikely to disable the PAM
requirement. The chromium SlackBuild however, we have currently
building without PAM or GConf/ORBit2 dependencies. This script should
be available in the 13.37 repo when it goes live. It is also available
here: 
https://github.com/yucatan/chromium

-- 
Erik Hanson
On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 14:30:16 +0100
Didier Spaier <didier.spaier@...> wrote:

> I would not object either google-chrome being built --without-pam if
> possible, nor built with PAM statically linked if possible.

The SlackBuild does not build google-chrome, it repackages a binary
that Google builds, and they are unlikely to disable the PAM
requirement. The chromium SlackBuild however, we have currently
building without PAM or GConf/ORBit2 dependencies. This script should
be available in the 13.37 repo when it goes live. It is also available
here: 
https://github.com/yucatan/chromium

--

-- 
Erik Hanson
Didier Spaier | 25 Mar 15:58 2011
Picon

Re: google-chrome

Le 25/03/2011 15:21, Erik Hanson a écrit :
> On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 14:30:16 +0100
> Didier Spaier<didier.spaier@...>  wrote:
>
>> I would not object either google-chrome being built --without-pam if
>> possible, nor built with PAM statically linked if possible.
>
> The SlackBuild does not build google-chrome, it repackages a binary
> that Google builds, and they are unlikely to disable the PAM
> requirement. The chromium SlackBuild however, we have currently
> building without PAM or GConf/ORBit2 dependencies. This script should
> be available in the 13.37 repo when it goes live. It is also available
> here:
> https://github.com/yucatan/chromium
>
I'll give it a try then, thanks Erik

Didier Spaier
Eric Schultz | 25 Mar 13:59 2011
Picon

Re: google-chrome

And...are we already rid of that 'jpeg upload' bug on this version of google-chrome?


I'm pretty sure this was a library version issue - can't remember which right now.  But still, getting it resolved would be AWESOME!!!  

I know the re-packaged deb ends up installing to /opt so would it be as easy as adding the version of the JPEG library that Chrome depends on into Chrome's bin directory?  Or a sibling lib directory that's earlier on Chrome's LIBPATH?

(Hopefully that last paragraph makes sense - I'm neither in front of my Slackware computer at this point nor very experienced at this sort of thing)



<div>
<p>&gt;&nbsp;<span class="Apple-style-span">And...are we already rid of that 'jpeg upload' bug on this version of google-chrome?</span></p>
<div>
<span class="Apple-style-span"><br></span>
</div>
<div><span class="Apple-style-span">I'm pretty sure this was a library version issue - can't remember which right now. &nbsp;But still, getting it resolved would be AWESOME!!! &nbsp;</span></div>
<div><span class="Apple-style-span"><br></span></div>
<div><span class="Apple-style-span">I know the re-packaged deb ends up installing to /opt so would it be as easy as adding the version of the JPEG library that Chrome depends on into Chrome's bin directory? &nbsp;Or a sibling lib directory that's earlier on Chrome's LIBPATH?</span></div>
<div><span class="Apple-style-span"><br></span></div>
<div><span class="Apple-style-span">(Hopefully that last paragraph makes sense - I'm neither in front of my Slackware computer at this point nor very experienced at this sort of thing)</span></div>
<div><span class="Apple-style-span"><br></span></div>
<div>
<div>
<a href="http://about.me/schultzter" target="_blank"></a><br>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
Ozan Türkyılmaz | 25 Mar 14:25 2011
Picon

Re: google-chrome

2011/3/25 Eric Schultz <schultzter <at> gmail.com>
>
> > And...are we already rid of that 'jpeg upload' bug on this version of google-chrome?
> I'm pretty sure this was a library version issue - can't remember which right now.  But still, getting it
resolved would be AWESOME!!!
> I know the re-packaged deb ends up installing to /opt so would it be as easy as adding the version of the JPEG
library that Chrome depends on into Chrome's bin directory?  Or a sibling lib directory that's earlier
on Chrome's LIBPATH?
> (Hopefully that last paragraph makes sense - I'm neither in front of my Slackware computer at this point
nor very experienced at this sort of thing)

 Similar to Firefox, It uses  wrapper script to set LIBPATH
accordingly so it uses bumbled libraries instead of system ones.
--
Ozan, BSc, BEng
_______________________________________________
SlackBuilds-users mailing list
SlackBuilds-users <at> slackbuilds.org
http://lists.slackbuilds.org/mailman/listinfo/slackbuilds-users
Archives - http://lists.slackbuilds.org/pipermail/slackbuilds-users/
FAQ - http://slackbuilds.org/faq/

Erik Hanson | 25 Mar 15:51 2011

Re: google-chrome

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 08:59:21 -0400
Eric Schultz <schultzter@...> wrote:

> > And...are we already rid of that 'jpeg upload' bug on this version
> > of
> google-chrome?
> 
> I'm pretty sure this was a library version issue - can't remember
> which right now.  But still, getting it resolved would be AWESOME!!!
> 
> I know the re-packaged deb ends up installing to /opt so would it be
> as easy as adding the version of the JPEG library that Chrome depends
> on into Chrome's bin directory?  Or a sibling lib directory that's
> earlier on Chrome's LIBPATH?

I could be wrong about this, it's been a while since I've dug through
the bug reports. The crash happens in the GTK file selector dialog.
google-chrome is linked against libjpeg.so.62 and GTK is linked against
libjpeg.so.8.

-- 
Erik Hanson
On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 08:59:21 -0400
Eric Schultz <schultzter@...> wrote:

> > And...are we already rid of that 'jpeg upload' bug on this version
> > of
> google-chrome?
> 
> I'm pretty sure this was a library version issue - can't remember
> which right now.  But still, getting it resolved would be AWESOME!!!
> 
> I know the re-packaged deb ends up installing to /opt so would it be
> as easy as adding the version of the JPEG library that Chrome depends
> on into Chrome's bin directory?  Or a sibling lib directory that's
> earlier on Chrome's LIBPATH?

I could be wrong about this, it's been a while since I've dug through
the bug reports. The crash happens in the GTK file selector dialog.
google-chrome is linked against libjpeg.so.62 and GTK is linked against
libjpeg.so.8.

--

-- 
Erik Hanson

Gmane