Am 06.11.2014 um 23:11 schrieb Johnny Hughes <johnny at centos.org>: > On 11/06/2014 02:30 PM, Phelps, Matthew wrote: >> On Thu, Nov 6, 2014 at 3:00 PM, Robert Arkiletian <robark at gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Nov 6, 2014 at 6:17 AM, Leon Fauster <leonfauster at googlemail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>> http://install.linux.ncsu.edu/pub/yum/itecs/public/chromium/rhel6/x86_64/ >>> Are there any differences between how these rpms were built vs the official >>> "supplementary" ones from RH? >>> >>> In other words, were they built with the same libs, patches, environment, >>> etc... ? > > Yes, those use the Developer Tool Set .. the ones from Red Hat do not. > > I can not get the Sources for the Red Hat supplemental channel because > they do distribute the pepperflash component. > > I am sorry, but Google is not interested in supporting CentOS. Insight into the process would help to roll it. Speak, are the spec files to build under a GPL-similar force? The above mentioned version are build and packaged in two different steps. It could be done smarter but that is just cosmetic. -- LF