Summary: | www-client/chromium-69.0.3497.100 builds again with gcc | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Gentoo Linux | Reporter: | Garry Filakhtov <filakhtov> |
Component: | Current packages | Assignee: | Chromium Project <chromium> |
Status: | RESOLVED OBSOLETE | ||
Severity: | normal | CC: | filakhtov, jstein |
Priority: | Normal | ||
Version: | unspecified | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- | |
Attachments: | chromium-69.0.3497.100.ebuild patch to build with GCC |
Description
Garry Filakhtov
2018-10-11 22:07:19 UTC
Created attachment 550612 [details, diff]
chromium-69.0.3497.100.ebuild patch to build with GCC
This is a modification to the ebuild I used for testing.
Tried a number of flag configurations:
- with and without component-build
- with and without widevine
- with and without cups
70.0.3538.54 and 71.0.3573.0 both fail to build with GCC 8.2.0. I don't want to switch back to gcc until I have some confidence that it will work for successive releases. I see someone else who really also is fed up of clang I have had successful successive between 67-69 (included) atm unable to build with either still gcc if i un-force clang or clang itself for and including 70+ I mentioned in another bug report about the chromium package itself being available from google themselves,so its really not like it needs to be build manually to create a package for everyone, the job is already done So why the resistance on making a binary available or must we be forced to build one of the most painful package to build when a solution is available as binary just as firefox and libreoffice have... At least it will give a choice to users who are unable to build it in its current half baked state... What will it take for the chromium team to take a bit of time to give us a binary version of chromium??? Btw as a note, i can build firefox without the slightest issues with clang and GCC, at least they have a choice it seems as well as binary for firefox if one wants, seems the chromium should take a hint and maybe ask help for chromium from the Firefox team... (In reply to Denis Descheneaux from comment #3) Firstly, I don't really appreciate the entitled attitude you are giving off. Please keep in mind that I am an unpaid volunteer who owes you absolutely nothing. I already maintain ebuilds for a pre-built version of Chromium - it's called www-client/google-chrome. I don't see any reason to maintain an inferior binary package based on developer builds of Chromium. Regarding GCC: I would greatly appreciate help in making the latest versions compile with both gcc and clang. If you can find/write patches to make M70 and M71 work, I would be happy to apply them. To make testing easier, I have added a magic variable to the chromium ebuilds called CHROMIUM_FORCE_CLANG. You can disable forced-clang like this: CHROMIUM_FORCE_CLANG=no emerge www-client/chromium Funny thing "I already maintain ebuilds for a pre-built version of Chromium - it's called www-client/google-chrome. I don't see any reason to maintain an inferior binary package based on developer builds of Chromium." This btw is a binary of chromium: https://download-chromium.appspot.com/ And Chromium and Chrome are two different things, perhaps you should inform yourself and learn the difference... https://threatbrief.com/difference-google-chrome-chromium-browser/ As for the inferior product its the one we can't build which you qualify as a superior product... as far as i am concerned Simply feels like your idea is i am right and everyone else is wrong, even if it does not work. You think i am being harsh with you, or you dont like it when users complain about something I wonder in #gentoo how many would prefer using a binary if you would actually care to make one, not everyone wants to build chromium and especially as it it now... (In reply to Denis Descheneaux from comment #6) Please do not leave any further comments on this bug report. Your input is not useful. Like i said, you are right and everyone else is wrong, because someone does not agree with you chromium-69 will be removed from the tree soon due to bug 668986. |