Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 37

Thread: Ubuntu 13.10 Likely Switching To Chromium Browser

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    525

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chenxiaolong View Post
    That will definitely happen. What problem do you have with it though? The ubuntu-desktop is just a metapackage that pulls in the default packages that Ubuntu ships with. In fact, if you remove it right now, upgrading to 13.10 won't install Chromium automatically.
    I don't have a problem with that per se, but with Lubuntu at least, if you remove the default browser it pulls Epiphany and other stuff, no matter what you have installed.
    That irritates me more.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    92

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by intellivision View Post
    I don't have a problem with that per se, but with Lubuntu at least, if you remove the default browser it pulls Epiphany and other stuff, no matter what you have installed.
    That irritates me more.
    Ahh, that's actually not related to [l,k,x,]ubuntu-desktop. That's caused because there are packages installed that depend on www-browser. www-browser is a virtual package that is provided by any browser installed on your system through apt-get. If you remove Chromium, apt is going to find the next browser package (probably alphabetically) that provides the www-browser virtual package. You can work around it by installing another browser before removing chromium.

    EDIT: Not all browser provide www-browser. The packagers have to explicit make the package provide this. "apt-cache search www-browser" will list the browsers that provide www-browser.
    Last edited by chenxiaolong; 05-16-2013 at 09:52 PM.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    20

    Default hmm?

    i genuinely think chromium would be better than firefox at the moment, its just a much more feature-packed browser

    there's some people spewing very technical reasons why chrome would not work. from a users perspective, i don't notice or care about those things; chromium still looks a lot better.

    if you want to be a prick then you can say chromium is using different kits and it does not have as much visible support as firefox, however its honestly not going to mess anything up or even have visible compatibility problems for at least the next 3 years.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,111

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Serge View Post
    QupZilla? Seriously?
    Yes, but: Before RussianNeuroMancer posted the link, I was under the impression that Ubuntu Touch will use QtWebKit.
    Considering that the argument is that both the Touch and the desktop variant of Ubuntu should use the same back-end, the obvious conclusion is to use a QtWebKit-based browser on the desktop as well.

    Turns out thanks to the link by RussianNeuroMancer the actual news is that Canonical plans to develop a toolkit-agnostic Blink-based library for use in GTK and Qt applications in both Ubuntu desktop and Ubuntu Touch.

    Quote Originally Posted by RussianNeuroMancer View Post
    Thanks for that. It clears the confusion. (Why is that link missing from the article?)
    To my surprise I actually like that proposal. Considering how much Canonical fucks up these days, this is a welcome change. Even though I'm not the biggest fan of Google's WebKit fork, turning Blink into something both Qt and GTK applications can (hopefully) easily use is great from a security POV as Google will just do all the patching work.

    Knowing Canonical I, however, fear that they fuck up the execution of this nice idea by releasing the glue library that sits between Blink and Qt/GTK under GPLv3-only+CLA.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    153

    Default

    Firefox has always scrolled better than chromium for me, and fast scrolling is (to me) much more important than pure javascript performance.
    Add that chromium eats (i've done my tests) FAR more ram than firefox when browsing in multitab, this make me think this is a marketing choice, chrome is getting popular among windows users and, generally, people thinks it is "cooler" than mozilla firefox.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    3,029

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uh20 View Post
    i genuinely think chromium would be better than firefox at the moment, its just a much more feature-packed browser
    Huh? What does chromium do that firefox doesn't? It doesn't even let you scroll the tab bar when you've got a bunch of tabs open.

    I don't disagree that Chromium might be a better fit for Ubuntu, but there's very clearly a tradeoff of giving up features. They're just features most users probably don't care that much about.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    525

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Awesomeness View Post
    Knowing Canonical I, however, fear that they fuck up the execution of this nice idea by releasing the glue library that sits between Blink and Qt/GTK under GPLv3-only+CLA.
    I thought that most of Mir (I assume this is what you were referencing) was licensed LGPLv3 or later, which in regards to libraries seems acceptable to me.
    I mean, don't get me wrong, I like permissive, but as long as dynamic linking doesn't constitute a license change, I'm fine with that.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by intellivision View Post
    I can see this happening very, very shortly.

    apt-get remove chromium

    Packages to be removed:
    chromium
    ubuntu-desktop


    Happens with Lubuntu, I sure hope it doesn't with Ubuntu.
    The first line is wrong. It should be typed as

    sudo apt-get --purge chromium

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,111

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by intellivision View Post
    I thought that most of Mir (I assume this is what you were referencing) was licensed LGPLv3 or later, which in regards to libraries seems acceptable to me.
    I mean, don't get me wrong, I like permissive, but as long as dynamic linking doesn't constitute a license change, I'm fine with that.
    There are always problems when “or later” is missing. Eg a GPLv2-only application can't use the library then and in the future GPLv4 applications may not be permitted to use LGPLv3-only libs (because of all that GPL compatibility stuff).

    Another problem would be that it would also generate needless confusion because Blink is LGPLv2-or-later. Even though not necessary legally required, inconsistent licensing is usually frowned upon.

    Best-case scenario would be that Canonical develops this toolkit-agnostic library directly within the Chromium project, follow Blink's licensing, and Chromium itself would use it via bindings for Skia.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Australian Capital Territory
    Posts
    14

    Default Chrome, Chromium are the same - here?

    Quote Originally Posted by meanpt View Post
    The first line is wrong. It should be typed as

    sudo apt-get --purge chromium
    Thanx - many noobs like me are still learning, cos we come from the CLI-free world of GUI computer usage (Windows, IOS, etc).

    In this long message-topic, writers seem to think Chrome is the same as Chromium. Chromium open-source seems better than closed source Chromium, because Google since March 2013 now has the policy that Youtube downloads are not allowed in Chrome. Google may have other commercial interests as well, like they are often accused with their other closed source products.

    Please someone - tell me that my suspicions of Google's "do no harm" publicity -- are wrong.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •