1) Added linguas support 2) gconf and orbit are optional deps, we can build them statically. Only GNOME users need gconf, but not KDE, XFCE, LXDE and non DE users. Even with USE="-gnome" firefox and gimp will try to start gconfd if gconf shared libraries are installed, because of this using INSTALL_MASK is not solution. The best solution will be adding USE="+shared-libs -static-libs" to orbit and gconf. You can watch "progress" there http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=13322 3) We do not need *.d files 4) Symlink instead of two same man pages 5) inspector is optional Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce:
Created attachment 229563 [details, diff] diff
Created attachment 229565 [details] ebuild
Um, I'm not really happy with making the ebuild more complex. I particularly hate the gconf hackery in the suggested patch. Don't get me wrong though: I just think that upstream is a better place to make changes like that. Other points: - why add a USE flag for inspector? What's the benefit? - why do we add LINGUAS? We have to download the .pak files anyway. - why make chrome.xml installation optional? The file is just so tiny, I don't see a real benefit. The symlink for man page sounds reasonable though.
>I particularly hate the gconf hackery in the suggested patch. Don't get me wrong though: I just think that upstream is a better place to make changes like that. Add patch to upstream bug 13322. Until this why should I run gconfd in KDE session? You know better solution? >why add a USE flag for inspector? What's the benefit? package size, installing only needed parts. >why do we add LINGUAS? We have to download the .pak files anyway. package size, why should I install translations that never will be used? or most chromium users know and use every day 51 language? look at other ebuilds in /usr/portage, most packages with LINGUAS download one archive with all translations and sources inside, you suggest removing LINGUAS from them? >why make chrome.xml installation optional? The file is just so tiny, I don't see a real benefit. for most users this file will be absolutely useless. Why /usr/share/gnome-control-center dir should exist in systems where GNOME is not installed and used?
Thanks for explaining the rationale behind the patch. I think that the space savings of not including the inspector are minimal, and each additional USE flag adds a maintenance burden. Also, the inspector is not the only thing in resources. They also contain a bookmark manager, and removing it results in a broken browser. Here's what takes the most disk space in www-client/chromium: 35M /usr/lib/chromium-browser/chrome 1.4M /usr/lib/chromium-browser/chrome.pak 7.1M /usr/lib/chromium-browser/locales 3.1M /usr/lib/chromium-browser/resources For the locales, could you explain why some files get renamed in the patch? Also, do the not-installed locales appear as a language choice in Chrome's options? What are the .d files? I don't see any in the output of equery files www-client/chromium, so I think they just don't get installed.
Also for chrome.xml, it is just a text file so we install it unconditionally (udev and logrotate flags got axed on this, see bug #198901 for example) I don't remember if the bookmark manager was available in 5.0.342.9, this may be why you did not have the problem Is es-419 a correct locale name? If not this could be sent upstream and simplify a lot the linguas part
>Also, the inspector is not the only thing in resources. They also contain a bookmark manager, and removing it results in a broken browser. >I don't remember if the bookmark manager was available in 5.0.342.9, this may be why you did not have the problem It was added in 5.0.360.0 and only dev channel versions have it, I tested betas only. Fixing doins for newer versions should be trivial. >For the locales, could you explain why some files get renamed in the patch? >Is es-419 a correct locale name? If not this could be sent upstream and simplify a lot the linguas part Good and not easy question. es-419 is 'Spanish appropriate for the Latin America and Caribbean region' http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language_code, but in Gentoo we have cat /usr/portage/profiles/desc/linguas.desc|grep -i latin.america es_LA - Spanish locale for Latin America but LA - is code for LAos, not for Latin America http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_3166-2:LA, so we should fix it in Gentoo, not in chromium. Another helpful link http://wiki.developers.facebook.com/index.php/Talk:Facebook_Locales#Some_more_discrepancies_... >Also, do the not-installed locales appear as a language choice in Chrome's options? They do, thanks for pointing, patch should be fixed. >What are the .d files? I don't see any in the output of equery files www-client/chromium, so I think they just don't get installed. Because you use latest hard masked dev channel, try beta chromium-5.0.342.9 >Also for chrome.xml, it is just a text file so we install it unconditionally (udev and logrotate flags got axed on this, see bug #198901 for example) Unfortunately chromium is made more for GNOME, then for none or all linux DEs at once. In future may exist more GNOME-only files, dirs or deps, that why I added gnome useflag - if you are not gnome user, you just want to install browser without any unneeded deps, files and running daemons.
Sorry, I believe the suggested changes make the ebuild less maintainable, and the benefits do not justify it. Closing. Feel free to suggest some smaller improvements in separate patches. For example, I'd be glad to use a symlink for the man page. However, the current patch assumes .bz2 compression and /usr/share/man location, which is a QA problem. After fixing these problems, that improvement is very likely to get accepted.
Chromium is not yet ported well to linux http://crbug.com/28287 , it also doesn't have make install, I hope we can add LINGUAS support later. While I use chromium you can download ebuilds with this fixes for betas from: http://pub.nikoli.msk.ru/portage-overlay/www-client/chromium/
http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=49371
