Package Details: google-chrome-dev 128.0.6559.0-1

Git Clone URL: https://aur.archlinux.org/google-chrome-dev.git (read-only, click to copy)
Package Base: google-chrome-dev
Description: The popular web browser by Google (Dev Channel)
Upstream URL: https://www.google.com/chrome
Keywords: chromium
Licenses: custom:chrome
Provides: google-chrome
Submitter: None
Maintainer: gromit
Last Packager: gromit
Votes: 649
Popularity: 0.35
First Submitted: 2009-06-05 21:02 (UTC)
Last Updated: 2024-06-27 21:11 (UTC)

Dependencies (12)

Required by (40)

Sources (3)

Pinned Comments

gromit commented on 2023-07-19 17:01 (UTC) (edited on 2023-07-19 17:02 (UTC) by gromit)

When reporting this package as outdated make sure there is indeed a new version for Linux Desktop. You can have a look at the "Dev updates" tag in Release blog for this.

You can also run this command to obtain the version string for the latest chrome version:

$ curl -sSf https://dl.google.com/linux/chrome/deb/dists/stable/main/binary-amd64/Packages | \
     grep -A1 "Package: google-chrome-unstable" | \
     awk '/Version/{print $2}' | \
     cut -d '-' -f1

Do not report updates for ChromeOS, Android or other platforms stable versions as updates here.

Latest Comments

« First ‹ Previous 1 .. 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 .. 91 Next › Last »

jnbek commented on 2011-03-04 03:08 (UTC)

Grr, the md5s for x64 is broken...

<deleted-account> commented on 2011-03-02 00:08 (UTC)

pkgver=11.0.686.0 x86_64: md5sums=('17cae321f43a34bf0a94fb8c0be88ede')

Det commented on 2011-02-19 12:49 (UTC)

@LookTJ, they kinda already are...

LookTJ commented on 2011-02-19 09:22 (UTC)

separate the architectures' md5 x86_64: md5sums=('739366fe80400cc5d574ed3966a8a8ff')

emhs commented on 2011-02-19 00:10 (UTC)

New update fixed it. Thanks, all.

<deleted-account> commented on 2011-02-18 23:58 (UTC)

@emhs, no, the md5 for i686 is correct - 3ec9ea320a357e0357968aad2ea604f6 google-chrome-unstable_current_i386.deb

emhs commented on 2011-02-18 22:56 (UTC)

tanguyr, I'm running i686. Is the md5 wrong there too?

Det commented on 2011-02-18 13:15 (UTC)

My pleasure.