I have been using CentOS on my laptop for a few days now and it works great! Great work-around for the Fedora GNOME 3 debacle.
But I'm starting to miss Google Chrome pretty seriously. Firefox is just not what it once was. It's slow. Spell check is weak. Sometimes it straight up fails to display pages after going "back". There are numerous details like this that just make FF almost intolerable. And based on current browser usage statistics I don't think I'm the only one who sees the difference which means the problem is only going to get worse.
Unfortunately Chrome is not available for CentOS 6.4:
Error: Package: google-chrome-stable-31.0.1650.57-1.x86_64 (google-chrome) Requires: libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4.15)(64bit)
This page [http://www.muktware.com/2013/02/google-says-red-hat-enterprise-linux-6-is-ob...] claims:
"Chrome, the browser in question here, is based on the open source project Chromium. Chromium developers seems to prefer the new C++11 for the obvious security reasons and ease of maintenance but it also means adopting a new toolchain and upgrading to GCC 4.6. This makes it hard to support those operating systems that ship with older C++ standard libraries. RHEL 6, among many others, is one such operating system."
What is the safest path out of this problem?
I am not particularly excited about running a package from a small third party. Particularly a browser.
Is this situation really that bad?
Mike
On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 1:24 AM, Michael B Allen ioplex@gmail.com wrote:
I have been using CentOS on my laptop for a few days now and it works great! Great work-around for the Fedora GNOME 3 debacle.
But I'm starting to miss Google Chrome pretty seriously. Firefox is just not what it once was. It's slow. Spell check is weak. Sometimes it straight up fails to display pages after going "back". There are numerous details like this that just make FF almost intolerable. And based on current browser usage statistics I don't think I'm the only one who sees the difference which means the problem is only going to get worse.
Unfortunately Chrome is not available for CentOS 6.4:
Error: Package: google-chrome-stable-31.0.1650.57-1.x86_64 (google-chrome) Requires: libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4.15)(64bit)
This page [ http://www.muktware.com/2013/02/google-says-red-hat-enterprise-linux-6-is-ob... ] claims:
"Chrome, the browser in question here, is based on the open source project Chromium. Chromium developers seems to prefer the new C++11 for the obvious security reasons and ease of maintenance but it also means adopting a new toolchain and upgrading to GCC 4.6. This makes it hard to support those operating systems that ship with older C++ standard libraries. RHEL 6, among many others, is one such operating system."
What is the safest path out of this problem?
If the Chromium builds that Johnny packaged still work, those are what you'll want to use. There may be a more recent source than is detailed here however: http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/2013-June/135238.html
http://www.if-not-true-then-false.com/2013/install-chromium-on-centos-red-ha...
I am not particularly excited about running a package from a small third party. Particularly a browser.
Is this situation really that bad?
Mike _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
If the Chromium builds that Johnny packaged still work, those are what you'll want to use. There may be a more recent source than is detailed here however: http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/2013-June/135238.html
http://www.if-not-true-then-false.com/2013/install-chromium-on-centos- red-hat-rhel/
Are these still being built / maintained? The last version I have is 28.0.1500.95. I'm sure Johnny has better things to do. He mentioned that at some point it might not even be possible to make new builds.
Thanks,
Josh
On 11/21/2013 11:16 AM, Trutwin, Joshua wrote:
If the Chromium builds that Johnny packaged still work, those are what you'll want to use. There may be a more recent source than is detailed here however: http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/2013-June/135238.html
http://www.if-not-true-then-false.com/2013/install-chromium-on-centos- red-hat-rhel/
Are these still being built / maintained? The last version I have is 28.0.1500.95. I'm sure Johnny has better things to do. He mentioned that at some point it might not even be possible to make new builds.
The newest versions actually do not build now on CentOS 6.x ... there are segfaults.
I will, after we get 6.5 released, give it a try again and see if with the latest gcc/glibc we can get chrome to build again.
On 21.11.2013 06:24, Michael B Allen wrote:
I have been using CentOS on my laptop for a few days now and it works great! Great work-around for the Fedora GNOME 3 debacle.
But I'm starting to miss Google Chrome pretty seriously. Firefox is just not what it once was. It's slow. Spell check is weak.
The stock Firefox is quite old (just the way I like it), the newest one packs quite a lot of changes, you should try it: ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/releases/latest/linux-x86_64/
On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 11:24 PM, Michael B Allen ioplex@gmail.com wrote:
I have been using CentOS on my laptop for a few days now and it works great! Great work-around for the Fedora GNOME 3 debacle.
But I'm starting to miss Google Chrome pretty seriously. Firefox is just not what it once was. It's slow. Spell check is weak. Sometimes it straight up fails to display pages after going "back". There are numerous details like this that just make FF almost intolerable. And based on current browser usage statistics I don't think I'm the only one who sees the difference which means the problem is only going to get worse.
Unfortunately Chrome is not available for CentOS 6.4:
It is with the script on this page:
http://chrome.richardlloyd.org.uk/
It grabs the missing libs then installs chrome.
-wes
On 2013-11-21 @14:41 zulu, Wes James scribed:
It is with the script on this page:
http://chrome.richardlloyd.org.uk/
It grabs the missing libs then installs chrome.
Be aware some on this list consider that script "criminal."
http://www.spinics.net/lists/centos/msg139107.html
I used it to install v28 and just got my 5th or 6th update of Chrome since then a couple days ago, from the google repo, by the way.
On 11/21/2013 11:40 AM, Darr247 wrote:
On 2013-11-21 @14:41 zulu, Wes James scribed:
It is with the script on this page:
Be aware some on this list consider that script "criminal."
At what point does it become less hassle to spin up a virtual machine with a distro recent-enough to run the latest Chrome? Virtualization is a wedge that puts more space between your rocks and your hard places.
Just for kicks, I downloaded a Chromium OS image and had it running in VMware Player in a few minutes. It wasn't as snappy as a native install, but it was usable. I could have signed in to Google and picked up my bookmarks if I'd wanted.
Having said that, I don't have any experience with either KVM or kidnapping libraries from other distros. I don't know which is harder and/or more fun (depends on what you're looking to get out of the experience), but it might be an option.
Most of us using CentOS/RHEL are in an "e"nterprise environment where that sort of thing just isn't allowed.
A supported, updated, secured version of chrome/chromium is essential for our CentOS environment, and I venture to guess many others' (including RHEL users).
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 11:22 AM, Chris Beattie cbeattie@geninfo.com wrote:
On 11/21/2013 11:40 AM, Darr247 wrote:
On 2013-11-21 @14:41 zulu, Wes James scribed:
It is with the script on this page:
Be aware some on this list consider that script "criminal."
At what point does it become less hassle to spin up a virtual machine with a distro recent-enough to run the latest Chrome? Virtualization is a wedge that puts more space between your rocks and your hard places.
Just for kicks, I downloaded a Chromium OS image and had it running in VMware Player in a few minutes. It wasn't as snappy as a native install, but it was usable. I could have signed in to Google and picked up my bookmarks if I'd wanted.
Having said that, I don't have any experience with either KVM or kidnapping libraries from other distros. I don't know which is harder and/or more fun (depends on what you're looking to get out of the experience), but it might be an option.
-- -Chris _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 11:22 AM, Chris Beattie cbeattie@geninfo.com wrote:
On 11/21/2013 11:40 AM, Darr247 wrote:
On 2013-11-21 @14:41 zulu, Wes James scribed:
It is with the script on this page:
Be aware some on this list consider that script "criminal."
At what point does it become less hassle to spin up a virtual machine with a distro recent-enough to run the latest Chrome? Virtualization is a wedge that puts more space between your rocks and your hard places.
Just for kicks, I downloaded a Chromium OS image and had it running in VMware Player in a few minutes. It wasn't as snappy as a native install, but it was usable. I could have signed in to Google and picked up my bookmarks if I'd wanted.
Having said that, I don't have any experience with either KVM or kidnapping libraries from other distros. I don't know which is harder and/or more fun (depends on what you're looking to get out of the experience), but it might be an option.
-- -Chris _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Apologies for top posting!! I'll try again:
Most of us using CentOS/RHEL are in an "e"nterprise environment where that sort of thing just isn't allowed.
A supported, updated, secured version of chrome/chromium is essential for our CentOS environment, and I venture to guess many others' (including RHEL users).
On 11/22/2013 11:29 AM, Phelps, Matt wrote:
Most of us using CentOS/RHEL are in an "e"nterprise environment where that sort of thing just isn't allowed.
A supported, updated, secured version of chrome/chromium is essential for our CentOS environment, and I venture to guess many others' (including RHEL users).
What happens if there comes a time when Johnny's heavy wizardry isn't enough to keep Chrome running on CentOS? Or if he just doesn't have time to do it? The browser that you need won't run on the OS which you can't change. You have a Kobayashi Maru scenario. You can't win unless you can change the rules.
I do something similar, but in my case, I provide virtual machines loaded with older versions of Internet Explorer for QA testers. The testers can't do any permanent damage to the VMs that the hypervisor won't fix when it reverts the VM after the tester logs off. Meanwhile, the version of IE on the testers' main machines is kept up-to-date.
On 11/22/2013 01:25 PM, Chris Beattie wrote:
On 11/22/2013 11:29 AM, Phelps, Matt wrote:
Most of us using CentOS/RHEL are in an "e"nterprise environment where that sort of thing just isn't allowed.
A supported, updated, secured version of chrome/chromium is essential for our CentOS environment, and I venture to guess many others' (including RHEL users).
What happens if there comes a time when Johnny's heavy wizardry isn't enough to keep Chrome running on CentOS? Or if he just doesn't have time to do it? The browser that you need won't run on the OS which you can't change. You have a Kobayashi Maru scenario. You can't win unless you can change the rules.
I do something similar, but in my case, I provide virtual machines loaded with older versions of Internet Explorer for QA testers. The testers can't do any permanent damage to the VMs that the hypervisor won't fix when it reverts the VM after the tester logs off. Meanwhile, the version of IE on the testers' main machines is kept up-to-date.
BTW, I like chrome, so that is why I am trying to maintain this ... but it is GOOGLE who is not maintaining the code to work on EL.
Just like Google also decided to NOT provide a Google Drive for Linux and a bunch of other things.
I am just about to say screw Google as they don't seem to care about enterprise linux at all .. if it isn't android or the absolute latest and greatest glibc/gtk/glib combo then they don't want to support it. If that is the case, who am I to make their code work for millions of users who THEY seem unconcerned about.
If someone from Google gives a crap about getting chrome working on the several million machine universe that is CentOS users, you guys contact me and let me know ... otherwise, I'll just assume you don't give a damn.
Thanks, Johnny Hughes The CentOS Project
On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 11:25 AM, Johnny Hughes johnny@centos.org wrote:
On 11/22/2013 01:25 PM, Chris Beattie wrote:
On 11/22/2013 11:29 AM, Phelps, Matt wrote:
Most of us using CentOS/RHEL are in an "e"nterprise environment where that sort of thing just isn't allowed.
A supported, updated, secured version of chrome/chromium is essential for our CentOS environment, and I venture to guess many others' (including RHEL users).
What happens if there comes a time when Johnny's heavy wizardry isn't enough to keep Chrome running on CentOS? Or if he just doesn't have time to do it? The browser that you need won't run on the OS which you can't change. You have a Kobayashi Maru scenario. You can't win unless you can change the rules.
I do something similar, but in my case, I provide virtual machines loaded with older versions of Internet Explorer for QA testers. The testers can't do any permanent damage to the VMs that the hypervisor won't fix when it reverts the VM after the tester logs off. Meanwhile, the version of IE on the testers' main machines is kept up-to-date.
BTW, I like chrome, so that is why I am trying to maintain this ... but it is GOOGLE who is not maintaining the code to work on EL.
Just like Google also decided to NOT provide a Google Drive for Linux and a bunch of other things.
I am just about to say screw Google as they don't seem to care about enterprise linux at all .. if it isn't android or the absolute latest and greatest glibc/gtk/glib combo then they don't want to support it. If that is the case, who am I to make their code work for millions of users who THEY seem unconcerned about.
If someone from Google gives a crap about getting chrome working on the several million machine universe that is CentOS users, you guys contact me and let me know ... otherwise, I'll just assume you don't give a damn.
Thanks, Johnny Hughes The CentOS Project
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Oh, I understand! Your efforts have been heroic, and well appreciated. My rant was (and has been) directed at Google. I definitely want more pressure on Google from whomever can apply it.
I was hoping there would eventually be a gcc47 in EPEL or some other repository that may help the situation.
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 08:07:21AM -0500, Phelps, Matt wrote: <snip>
I was hoping there would eventually be a gcc47 in EPEL or some other repository that may help the situation.
gcc47 is available in devtools-1.1 (not out of testing) gcc48 will be available in devtools-2.0
Cheers,
Tru
On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 11:25 AM, Johnny Hughes johnny@centos.org wrote:
BTW, I like chrome, so that is why I am trying to maintain this ... but it is GOOGLE who is not maintaining the code to work on EL. [snip]
I appreciate your efforts on getting it working previously.
At my office there are a bunch of Red Hat and CentOS desktop users. I can't imagine that we're that much different from a lot of other IT shops. Anyhoo, I'm building it via ChromeOS. Haven't gotten everything working yet, but my hope is to run it within a VM. It's a horrible kludge, but the alternative is to dispense with the Google versions of sync, documents, etc..That's looking a lot more attractive :D
-
Chris Beattie -
Darr247 -
Johnny Hughes -
Kwan Lowe -
Michael B Allen -
Nux! -
Phelps, Matt -
SilverTip257 -
Tru Huynh -
Trutwin, Joshua -
Wes James