On Saturday 14 July 2012 4:28 am, Jos Vos wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 14, 2012 at 12:32:32AM +0000, Adam Bishop wrote:
> > Google also supply RPM's directly. See
> > https://www.google.com/intl/en/chrome/browser/?hl=en&platform=linux
> >
> > IIRC Chrome statically links a lot of its dependancies, so there's a
> > strong chance that the Fedora/OpenSUSE build will just work.
>
> Yes, but he asked explicitly for Chromium and besides that, the Google
> Chrome RPM's are very bad from a packaging point of view.
>
> I'm giving talks about RPM packaging and I also have a talk called
> "Surviving the RPM Package and Repository Jungle".  In that talk
> I use the Google Chrome RPM as an example of a very bad package.
>
> For example, ut has a nearly 1000 lines post-install script, it
> lacks 73 out of 93 dependencies, it installs 20 unpackaged files, etc.

What is driving the use of Chromium:  A number of customers want to 
use "Google Documents",soon to be something else,  to store project info that 
is shared between customers system engineering and our hardware & software 
developers.   What we had proposed is that we give them access to a back door 
on our website but putting files there is too hard for them as they insist on 
using their hand held devices (smart phones) to read, make comments and send 
updated directions.   I call this "real time design" and not a real 
structured engineering environment.    To keep sanity in this mix - once a 
week I edit it all and its a new folder come Monday Morning.   The customer 
is "almost always right" as he is paying the bill.   At some slice in time 
the design & changes are frozen in time and that is what we design and build 
to.   It is a very different way to work.  In my opinion not very cost 
effective due to customer driven changes.   He just didn't or could not put 
it all down correctly the first time.

I will attempt to build an RPM package for SL 5.7 to suit our needs and share 
results as we get them.   In the mean time we rely on VM Ware 8.