Talk:Chromium

From FedoraProject

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(Update unstableChromium repo: new section)
(Unsigned packages: new section)
 
Line 14: Line 14:
  
 
I was wondering when you were going to update the Chromium repo for fedora 17 from 17 to 19
 
I was wondering when you were going to update the Chromium repo for fedora 17 from 17 to 19
 +
 +
== Unsigned packages ==
 +
 +
I am using the referenced chromium repository: http://repos.fedorapeople.org/repos/spot/chromium-stable
 +
 +
Currently, the corresponding .repo file comes with gpgcheck=0 set.
 +
 +
Which is of course [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man-in-the-middle_attack really bad].
 +
 +
And it seems that the packages are not signed as well.
 +
 +
 +
--[[User:Gsauthof|Gsauthof]] ([[User talk:Gsauthof|talk]]) 17:09, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 17:09, 24 November 2012

There is an issue involving print dialogs being opened when some sites are visited. After much discussion/testing on this bug: http://goo.gl/8tCg, the problem seems to be with the version being distributed here. Is there a place to submit bugs like this?

Contents

[edit] Video support

Is there a plan for html5 video? It can not really be a problem with ogg and webm.

You need to install chromium-ffmpegsumo and that will enable webm support. Yamatt 10:52, 15 December 2011 (UTC)


[edit] Stable vs Unstable Chromium

You should not use Tom Callaway's chromium repo because it installs unstable Chromium 11 that crashes all the time, instead use these instructions to install stable Chromium 10 on Fedora: http://fusionlinux.org/2011/04/19/install-chromium-on-fedora/

[edit] Update unstableChromium repo

I was wondering when you were going to update the Chromium repo for fedora 17 from 17 to 19

[edit] Unsigned packages

I am using the referenced chromium repository: http://repos.fedorapeople.org/repos/spot/chromium-stable

Currently, the corresponding .repo file comes with gpgcheck=0 set.

Which is of course really bad.

And it seems that the packages are not signed as well.


--Gsauthof (talk) 17:09, 24 November 2012 (UTC)