Chromium and Firefox Nightly: No update on Launchpad or Debian Backports

Greetings to all again. This time I come to talk about browsers Mozilla Firefox y Chromium, which are Open Source and they are used in Windows and Mac as well as in most of the GNU / Linux distros (both the official compilations and their forks).

However, I have noticed that when downloading Mozilla Firefox from the official website, I come across a version compressed in BZip in tarball and in the case of Chromium, in ZIP format.

While Mozilla Firefox and Chromium make it easier for distros developers to package their stable versions in their own way, in the case of Chromium there is little or no interest in offering a version that is at least current and decent enough to be able to fully enjoy it. (In the case of Google Chrome, you can see that there is great interest in updating your browser, but with its counterpart in open source there is an interest that leaves much to be desired).

With Mozilla Firefox I had no problems keeping it up to date, since almost all distros are up to date with the releases made by the Mozilla Foundation (even Debian update with the same frequency than its official equivalent its fork), but Chromium has some distros that do not have a version on par with the official versions of Google Chrome, such as the Debian case (It doesn't even have a backport or at least a special repo like Iceweasel does).

The case of Ubuntu (you have to add the security repo provided by Launchpad in order to keep your packages up to date and apparently, it stayed in version 25 in all versions even in Lucid), so I decided to use a script made specifically to install the nightly version of Chromium from almost automated way by Debian forum users, since officially I can't find any repos or Linux Mint that are really up-to-date from the Debian family (on other distros, they are on par with the stable version of Google Chrome).

If I could find a repo in which to keep the stable versions of Chromium up to date (or at least the nightly builds), I would greatly appreciate the help. For now, I will continue to use the script so that I can work with Chromium's nightly Build (that custom that I just imported when I used Windows).


The content of the article adheres to our principles of editorial ethics. To report an error click here!.

32 comments, leave yours

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published.

*

*

  1. Responsible for the data: Miguel Ángel Gatón
  2. Purpose of the data: Control SPAM, comment management.
  3. Legitimation: Your consent
  4. Communication of the data: The data will not be communicated to third parties except by legal obligation.
  5. Data storage: Database hosted by Occentus Networks (EU)
  6. Rights: At any time you can limit, recover and delete your information.

  1.   elav said

    Well, it is normal that you cannot find Firefox in Debian, because although it is OpenSource, it has parts (such as the logo) with restrictive licenses that do not meet the objectives of Debian, hence you find Iceweasel.

    In Squeeze I don't know, but in Debian Wheezy we have the latest stable version of Chromium pretty soon. Right now there is the version: 26.0.1410.43-1.

    1.    eliotime3000 said

      I have no problems with Iceweasel in Debian Stable, as it works for me the same way as Firefox does (its mozilla.debian.net backport is the one I use to keep the Iceweasel up to date and it is synchronized with experimental), but in Chromium it is a problem having to add an experimental repo in a stable version of Debian (in Testing it is as if you were adding a backport).

      Now, if one wants to use the nightly build version, he would have to do the same feat that is used when installing Firefox (make a script to install / update the browser) and have at least version 3 of the kernel (I already tried using the kernel version that came by default on my PC, but apparently it would work on Wheezy without problems).

      With other programs such as LibreOffice, Skype and / or Angry IP Scanner the installation has been easy for me, since I did not have to use any installation / update script, but to have to use nothing more and nothing less than the DPKG and / or GDebi .

    2.    Anonymous said

      I have not investigated reasons, but it amazes me that a version of Chromium that if I'm not mistaken was only released in April is already part of the Wheezy package, while Iceweasel 17 being November is not. Hopefully it does not bring problems for being so recent.

      1.    eliotime3000 said

        Which version of Iceweasel are you referring to? To the rolling Release that is on mozilla.debian.net or to the ESR that is already in the Wheezy backport? Because the Iceweasel I have is 20 and I have it in my Debian Squeeze: http://i.imgur.com/yavIei5.png (from mozilla.debian.net backport because Squeeze backport is still at 10 ESR).

        1.    Anonymous said

          The default version for Wheezy, which is 10.0.12, as is 3.5.16 for Squeeze.

          http://packages.debian.org/wheezy/iceweasel

          I always thought it would be good to accept version 17.0 when it came out but they did not get to do it, they left it in experimental and in the backport for Squeeze of mozilla.debian.net.

          1.    eliotime3000 said

            It's a shame, but it is valid to use the Debian Squeeze blackport from mozilla.debian.net if you don't want to risk using the experimental repo (in itself the quality of the repos is almost the same, but it will not include repos from poor quality).

  2.   raffle said

    There are two repositories that keep Chromium up to date, one stable (version 25.0.1364.172) and development (27.0.1453.6), the respective PPAs are ppa: av-shkop / chromium and ppa: av-shkop / chromium-dev

    1.    eliotime3000 said

      Thank you very much, but I prefer to add the PPAs to the old one (with the keyserver and editing the "sources.list" file). This way I avoid problems with administrative permissions and with sudo (as I have already taken a liking to "su", right?).

  3.   frame said

    In debian things are very simple, if you want to stay in the stable branch, you have to give yourself the idea that the programs will not be in their most modern version. Now if you want to have the latest versions of the programs (or almost) use testing or unstable 😉

    1.    eliotime3000 said

      I am happy with Debian Stable, because I hardly use some programs that I keep up to date (browsers and skype, of course). But as for Chromium, they have not made a backport especially for the stable edition of Debian as they do with Iceweasel (which by the way, gives you to choose even the aurora version and works normally in Debian Stable).

      As for the experimental branch, Debian Stable asks me for your public key so that it can be used for any specific program.

      1.    tavo said

        It is that Debian in its stable version is unbreakable and that security that it gives you over time makes it difficult to replace it. This Debian Squeeze of which I write has been installed since it was launched, several years ago and today it presented the first flaw, rather, the fault was mine. It turns out that for the first time the graph does not start due to lack of space in the disk gdm could not write registry entries. I solved it by deleting some icon packages and other bullshit from a tty, then I reconfigured all the packages and it booted Again without problems, I have to resize the disk where the system is installed since it is quite adjusted, other than that I do not cease to be amazed that after years without maintenance it works with the same fluidity of the first day

        1.    eliotime3000 said

          And that's why I like Debian: abandoned for so many years and one day you turn it on and it continues to function normally.

  4.   diazepam said

    The newest version of Chromium is on sid. The newest version of Iceweasel is in experimental.

    1.    eliotime3000 said

      The problem is not with Iceweasel (thank goodness I use the mozilla.debian.net backport which is on par with the experimental repo with the stable, beta and aurora versions), but with Chromium, which I can't add the experimental repo of Chromium because I am precisely in stable (in testing you can add the repo without problems).

      1.    pandev92 said

        The truth does not change much between using version 17 or 18 of chromium and 25 ..., and more taking into account that chromium does not have the flash player pepper by default, so put your soul in peace, or download chrome from its website

        1.    eliotime3000 said

          I already use Google Chrome for Linux, but I precisely work with both browsers because I have two GMail accounts.

          In addition, in Google Chrome I deactivated the Pepper Flash Player since it was much less fluent than the same Flash Player 11.2 that Adobe offers (thank goodness that in the official repos it had a .deb package that had a script that automatically downloaded and installed the flash player).

  5.   Rolo said

    Let's agree that debian squeeze (the current stable one) within three days will become oldstable therefore it is not logical that there are package updates with new versions not even in backports.
    and it is more than likely that it will end up being much more complex to continue having the most recent versions of programs such as chromium and iceweasel, among others more than anything when squeeze goes to the archive repos.

    1.    eliotime3000 said

      It may be, but on the official Debian site they have not announced anything official so far (for now it is news that has been rumored on the mailing lists), as it would have to be officially published in their news section.

      1.    Rolo said

        in the end squeeze became oldstable as I had mentioned before.
        It was very evident that they were not going to continue putting more current versions of the programs when they were about to go to squeeze to archive.

  6.   Alf said

    Personally, it is not in my interest to go with the latest version of the browsers, because the add-ons and extensions that some of us use are not developed at the same time, and when the browser is updated the add-ons are rendered useless.

    1.    Anonymous said

      Good, I thought I was the only crazy person around here who preferred an ESR to a Rapid Release.

    2.    pandev92 said

      That generally only happens in firefox and its primitive extensions mode.

      1.    eliotime3000 said

        Don't tell me, because in the Chromium 25 that I have, there are applications that do not appear if I do not have the version that is on par with Google Chrome.

      2.    msx said

        Firefox and Debian have their share of primitivism, however in the particular case of Firefox I don't think it is so.
        Rather, something different happens: Chrome / Chromium extensions are very similar to Opera's in that they allow a very defined subset of parts of the browser that can be accessed and are programmed in JS, that is why they can be activated and deactivated when I fly so easily
        In the case of Firefox, on the contrary, the extensions are programmed using Firefox's own XUL framework, which is why they are so powerful -in fact they are mini-native applications- and being so linked to the browser, any new changes in the browser affects the installed extensions.
        Regards!

        1.    eliotime3000 said

          In Firefox / Iceweasel / IceCat they work wonders if one dispenses with the extensions; In Chromium / Google Chrome, you have the ease of using the extensions without necessarily having to depend on a framework in most cases.

    3.    eliotime3000 said

      With Firefox / Iceweasel, you have the freedom to choose a version that gives you extended support (in the case of ESRs), but this is not the case with Chromium.

      I use Chromium mostly to be able to test various components that are added to HTML5 / CSS3 and other web languages ​​that are innovating. If you can standardize those languages ​​as soon as possible, you won't need to rely on rolling releases.

  7.   George said

    Debian created its fork of firefox many years ago, I remember there were many complaints about this, accusing them of the Taliban for a logo (both mozilla and debian). Debian is not very fond of changing "entire" versions every month, the emphasis is on stability rather than having the latest. It is less easy to install and update the tar.bz2 package for mozilla in debian and ubuntus discontinued, you just have to extract it to a system folder and create the accesses. In case anyone needs it, I leave some lists of commands here http://paste.desdelinux.net/4767 so that they do it in a single order without even needing repositories or another browser to download the package, Regards

    1.    eliotime3000 said

      Thank you very much for the script. In fact, I'm using Iceweasel 20 (version that is on par with Firefox) that I got from mozilla.debian.net and it's doing great on my Debian Stable.

      In addition, the performance between Firefox and Iceweasel is practically the same, the difference that the official Firefox has with the community Firefox is that it lacks the updater that appears in the "About" window, in addition to that forks such as Iceweasel and IceCat usually have one than another patch or other modification (GNU's IceCat blocks Flash Player execution and forces the use of free plugins such as Gnash, in addition to being the original IceWeasel).

  8.   msx said

    More forum question than blog post.
    In fact… IS a forum question.

    1.    eliotime3000 said

      Forgive me for writing in [forum] [/ forum] mode, but sometimes many aspects are not emphasized such as the lack of homogeneity in the Chromium versions (now almost all the distros are in version 26, which is currently the official version of Google Chrome), but at least Firefox and forks are relatively all on par (in the case of Iceweasel, the mozilla.debian.net backport is at version 20 in the official version, as well as version 21 in beta and 22 in aurora).

  9.   Alf said

    This is not with the topic in question, but it has to do with firefox

    http://muyseguridad.net/2013/05/03/mozilla-critica-al-productor-del-software-espia-gubernamental-finfisher/

    Serious?

    1.    eliotime3000 said

      Apparently, this he mentions goes against the philosophy of the Mozilla Foundation: a discreet browser and respectful of your internet habits.

bool (true)