Re: texmaker, Qt and Chromium

[ng0]

Efraim Flashner <address@hidden> writes:

> [ Unknown signature status ]
> On Sat, Oct 08, 2016 at 11:00:29PM +0200, Ricardo Wurmus wrote:
>> 
>> Efraim Flashner <address@hidden> writes:
>> 
>> > AFAIK Chromium doesn't modify any of its bundled software. Would it make
>> > sense to create a chromium-source package that replaces the bundled
>> > sources with our sources, allowing us to keep the chromium source and
>> > the bundled source up-to-date. Then we could use this new
>> > 'chromium-source' package as a replacement source for
>> > chromium/inox/qtwebengine?
>> 
>> Are you certain they don’t modify their bundle?  I thought that was the
>> whole point for them to bundle things in the first place: to be able to
>> modify things without having to coordinate with the various upstreams.
>> 
>> ~~ Ricardo
>> 
>
> I'm not sure, but I assumed it was so that anyone could download the
> source and run './configure; make; (sudo) make install' without worrying
> about those pesky things known as dependancies.
>
> -- 
> Efraim Flashner   <address@hidden>   אפרים פלשנר
> GPG key = A28B F40C 3E55 1372 662D  14F7 41AA E7DC CA3D 8351
> Confidentiality cannot be guaranteed on emails sent or received unencrypted

As far as I know - I could be wrong - I linked to the bug ticket for
unbundling chromium in my inox.scm ... Fedora got so frustrated over
the whole, well... neglection.. of the ticket that they forked
chromium. I would say at best it (unbundling) just works, but not with
all of the dependencies/bundles as far as I understand comments Gentoo
and Archlinux do in their chrome/chromium/inox related packages.