[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [GNU-linux-libre] Status of google chrome and chromium
From: |
Karl Goetz |
Subject: |
Re: [GNU-linux-libre] Status of google chrome and chromium |
Date: |
Thu, 7 Jan 2010 10:48:26 +1030 |
On Wed, 6 Jan 2010 15:19:44 +0100
jaromil <address@hidden> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA256
>
>
> re all,
Hi mate,
Guess I'll stick my oar in here.
> more on Chromium / Iron:
I forwarded a message about this onto someone from this list on the
4th, guess I should have sent it here directly.
> I've been using Iron now for a while and it very much resembles
> Chromium; after being generally happy with the speed of the software,
> I was looking for more precise informations about the patches applied
> by Iron - then today a friend (Google employee) passed me this link:
>
> http://neugierig.org/software/chromium/notes/2009/12/iron.html
I saw the link a few days after it was published (benefit of knowing a
chromium hacker ;)), so...
> I still didn't do a code review on Iron myself, nor even diff'd its
> source against Chromium's trunk, however the above link reads like a
> veritable analysis to me that, along with the poor documentation on
> Iron that its developers provide, basically erodes my trust for futher
> usage.
... I have had a quick look at it.
Iron makes no source available via (D)RCS, only two downloads via
rapidshare. The two parts are a split 7zip file, so they need to be
cat'd together before use.
I exported chromium git (well... svn, but my mates stuck it in git for
his work) at various points, and diffed against Iron.
du -hs Desktop/rev-iron-vs-chromium-*
365M Desktop/rev-iron-vs-chromium-130b4651d.diff
351M Desktop/rev-iron-vs-chromium-344bc62c.diff
365M Desktop/rev-iron-vs-chromium-34b31da1.diff
394M Desktop/rev-iron-vs-chromium-a615c2e8.diff
These are reasonably average sizes. Smallest I got (about 8.5 million
lines) was 340MB, largest about 500MB (15 million lines). The numeric
id's before .diff are the git commit.
I hope I was doing something wrong ... (On the subject of doing
something wrong, I don't remember exactly what I did anymore, so I
guess I should have made notes at the time :/)
My closest estimate put the fork time between the start of June and the
start of September last year. Chromiums google calendar isn't populated
before July, so I couldnt jump directly to a known release on that
front :(
> I'm now opting for Chromium, nevertheless it would be really nice if
> the GNU project can host a patch-set that is peer-reviewed for
> characteristics that we regard as freedom and privacy respecting.
Surely we only want to host a diff if upstream isn't willing to accept
our changes?
> All doe there might be no need for that at all: from what I can hear
> in informal conversations among Google developers, it seems that the
> Chromium codebase might conform with our requirements.
I'm told putting Chromium into incognito mode does most of what we
want, and its possible they would accept (build time?) options for the
others.
kk
--
Karl Goetz, (Kamping_Kaiser / VK5FOSS)
Debian contributor / gNewSense Maintainer
http://www.kgoetz.id.au
No, I won't join your social networking group
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature