Package Details: google-chrome 136.0.7103.113-1

Git Clone URL: https://aur.archlinux.org/google-chrome.git (read-only, click to copy)
Package Base: google-chrome
Description: The popular web browser by Google (Stable Channel)
Upstream URL: https://www.google.com/chrome
Keywords: chromium
Licenses: custom:chrome
Submitter: None
Maintainer: gromit
Last Packager: gromit
Votes: 2277
Popularity: 12.19
First Submitted: 2010-05-25 20:25 (UTC)
Last Updated: 2025-05-14 19:12 (UTC)

Dependencies (12)

Sources (3)

Pinned Comments

gromit commented on 2023-04-15 08:22 (UTC) (edited on 2023-05-08 21:42 (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When reporting this package as outdated make sure there is indeed a new version for Linux Desktop.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 "Stable 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-stable" | \
     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 .. 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 Next › Last »

Det commented on 2012-03-12 12:36 (UTC)

What xduugu meant was that this was _supposed_ to depend on 'openssl098' (0.9.8.t) - instead of the even older 'openssl-compatibility' (0.9.8.n) that he put there by mistake.

kkimdev commented on 2012-03-12 01:50 (UTC)

@t3ddy wait, your PKGBUILD still depends on openssl098, not openssl-compatibility.

t3ddy commented on 2012-03-11 12:54 (UTC)

Fixed, thanks.

xduugu commented on 2012-03-11 09:27 (UTC)

I just want to point out that this new release depends on openssl-compatibility again. Dunno if this was intended.

t3ddy commented on 2012-03-11 08:50 (UTC)

This is not a good news since I'm using the same template for the three versions of chrome.

sanusart commented on 2012-03-11 08:33 (UTC)

[ Temporary ] Working PKGBUILD: http://pastebin.com/8puzXpTg

Det commented on 2012-03-10 19:43 (UTC)

T3ddy just figured that if the Dev Chrome was using it, so should this.

<deleted-account> commented on 2012-03-10 13:16 (UTC)

libpng12[0] is still a dependency, it seems to have gone missing from the PKGBUILD. [0]: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=33795

Det commented on 2012-03-09 14:02 (UTC)

Because it's out of date.

crabman commented on 2012-03-09 13:55 (UTC)

building fails with: curl: (22) The requested URL returned error: 404

Det commented on 2012-03-08 20:35 (UTC)

Yes. Lucid doesn't use it.

mike.cloaked commented on 2012-03-08 20:06 (UTC)

Is there any reason it can't depend instead on the openssl 1.0 from core? http://www.archlinux.org/packages/core/i686/openssl/

xduugu commented on 2012-03-08 14:31 (UTC)

Could you please change the openssl-0.9.8 dependency from openssl-compatibility[1] to openssl098[2], since the former uses a build from 2010 which contains security issues. Thanks. [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=36308 [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=40574

Det commented on 2012-03-07 18:56 (UTC)

Uhhhhhhh... no?

mike.cloaked commented on 2012-03-07 18:49 (UTC)

By the way libpng12 on which chrome depends was updated on Feb 20th in the AUR - in order to be up to date this package should also be updated.

mike.cloaked commented on 2012-03-07 18:41 (UTC)

Everything seems to work OK for me installing the new version .....66 though I am doing this some hours after the date/time on the previous comments - I had previously installed openssl-compatibility from the AUR. If you tried to install openssl-compatibility from the normal pacman repos then it won't work.

BasioMeusPuga commented on 2012-03-07 08:40 (UTC)

I'm getting the same 404 error. The URLs are out of date. The following works, however: 1. Put the md5sum of the chrome rpm in the pkgbuild ("388db19d984d7cfabac98ec2364b6d42" for x86_64) 2. Use the following URL in the source: "https://dl.google.com/linux/direct/google-chrome-stable_current_x86_64.rpm" Seems to build just fine after that.

<deleted-account> commented on 2012-03-07 07:19 (UTC)

I have this error: -> Downloading google-chrome-stable-17.0.963.65-124586.x86_64.rpm... % Total % Received % Xferd Average Speed Time Time Time Current Dload Upload Total Spent Left Speed 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 --:--:-- --:--:-- --:--:-- 0 curl: (22) The requested URL returned error: 404

sanusart commented on 2012-03-07 06:01 (UTC)

Just a quick one http://pastebin.com/CmEWiR43

<deleted-account> commented on 2012-03-07 02:41 (UTC)

@jarav spotify installed those.

Hexcles commented on 2012-03-07 00:18 (UTC)

Package out of date. File not found(404) on dl.google.com.

<deleted-account> commented on 2012-03-06 18:57 (UTC)

I am having problems because of the openssl-compatibility dependency. I am not able to install that package because of errors: error: failed to commit transaction (conflicting files) openssl-compatibility: /usr/lib/libcrypto.so.0.9.8 exists in filesystem openssl-compatibility: /usr/lib/libssl.so.0.9.8 exists in filesystem Errors occurred, no packages were upgraded.

mike.cloaked commented on 2012-03-05 22:43 (UTC)

OK I have just seen the other comments from early January now - I did not spot that there were additional comments not listed by default on this page unless specifically clicking on the appropriate link - apologies as I am fairly newly converted to arch from Fedora which I was using for the past 8 years! I note that there were similar suggestions but not exactly the same as mine early on in the discussion from a couple of months back - anyway if t3ddy can utilise the additional info from my earlier comment in his script then it may be of help to him in maintaining chrome updates. It does need a little scripting work but it should be do-able. The only change in the PKGBUILD file would then be a switch to sha1sum instead of md5sum but that is a minor change.

mike.cloaked commented on 2012-03-05 22:18 (UTC)

OK - no problem - if the t3ddy script that generates the pkgbuild file can use the information that I gave then it should be relatively simple to extract the version number and compare with the previous version and only generate a new packagebuild file if the version changes - that could even be automated and executed say daily? I was only trying to see if there was a way to both reduce the maintainer workload and also make the update perhaps more timely... I hope that is potentially useful?

Det commented on 2012-03-05 22:03 (UTC)

I meant that t3ddy mentioned some time ago to be using some script to generate the PKGBUILD for him. And the problem with auto-fetching PKGBUILD is that yes, it's better when the package would otherwise be out-of-date and it also eases up the maintainer's task but the whole point of _having_ a packaging system with linux is that the system/packages update automatically. With semi-automatically updating packages you'd first have to find out whether there even was a new version and then manually reinstall the package. Who wants that? E: also, I mistook you for ruario. That's why I figured you knew about the script thing.

mike.cloaked commented on 2012-03-05 21:43 (UTC)

If there is a way to utilise the downloaded file that I suggested, and extract the information required within the existing but amended PKGBUILD file then it would make life easier for the users? I don't know if it is possible but at least there is a chance to make the whole thing automatic rather than needing manual intervention by the maintainer each time chrome is updated? Of course I could just be too naive to know there is no simple way to make this work and would be happy to be informed whether or not my suggestion is possible or not.

mike.cloaked commented on 2012-03-05 20:40 (UTC)

Which script does t3ddy use? Why is it a better solution than having a self-contained script so that new amended copies are not necessary mostly? What is the problem with curl/awk anyway?

Det commented on 2012-03-05 18:43 (UTC)

If you're talking about replacing the "pkgver" line with some curl/awk odds and ends, you can forget it. If you're just talking about the script t3ddy is using, then that's a very nice solution.

mike.cloaked commented on 2012-03-05 18:26 (UTC)

I was wondering today if it might be possible to get at the version number and checksum information direct from the google repo, and by trial and error I have found today that it is possible to get at this information. By typing the command as in the following you can see that the right information is extracted: [mike@home1 chrome-test]$ curl -s https://dl.google.com/linux/chrome/rpm/stable/x86_64/repodata/primary.xml.gz |gzip -d| awk -F\" '/<name>google-chrome-stable<\/name><arch>/ { print $6 ; print $8 ; print $13}' 17.0.963.65 124586 >2d0a251fb70396a2943c85d58aa859e1392fd101</checksum><summary>Google Chrome</summary><description>The web browser from Google So in principle the "ver" and "rel" numbers are easy to extract and in addition the sha1sum can be extracted from the last line as well - and this could allow a single aur PGGBUILD file to be written that would extract all the required information without having to download a new tarball each time google updates chrome (unless they changed the format of the "primary.xml.gz file that contains the data. I wonder if a suitable PGKBUILD file could be constructed based on the above information? I am not that expert at awk commands and it might be quicker if someone really familiar with awk could do that? If so it would make for a really nice update to this AUR package, since the current file needs to be manually updated with the new version numbers and checksum every time google updates chrome? The checksum would need to be changed from md5 to sha1 but that is presumably not a huge change? A very similar scheme would presumably also work for beta and dev versions? Either way it is easy enough to download the "primary.xm.gz" file to tinker with the rest of the necessary scripting. I hope this might help? Thanks

<deleted-account> commented on 2012-03-05 14:20 (UTC)

fixed PKGBUILD (new version): http://pastebin.com/4jymgTbY

dejavu commented on 2012-02-24 19:27 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for the answers. First I meant "chrome://plugins" ;-) I was interested in the built-in flash of chrome because of the advertised future of flash in linux. I am using 64 bit and so therefore it's not included. Thanks anyway ...

t3ddy commented on 2012-02-24 07:49 (UTC)

Chrome's flash plugin is available only for 32 bit's package. You've got to install flashplugin if you're on 64 bit.

<deleted-account> commented on 2012-02-24 07:18 (UTC)

@t3ddy I not have flash installed and not have the plugin why the plugin native from g-chrome not is installed??

t3ddy commented on 2012-02-23 20:04 (UTC)

Do you mean in "about:plugins"? I've got it. Are you on 32 or 64 bit?

dejavu commented on 2012-02-23 19:46 (UTC)

Thanks for the package! But I can't see the flashplugin in "about:chrome" included.

mike.cloaked commented on 2012-02-16 14:13 (UTC)

That was quick - and thanks for updating.

mike.cloaked commented on 2012-02-16 11:08 (UTC)

Any chance this package will be updated to version 17.0.963.56-121963 which was released in the last day or so? Thanks.

Det commented on 2012-02-05 22:33 (UTC)

Of course it doesn't. That's repackaging not building.

Vrtak-CZ commented on 2012-02-05 22:29 (UTC)

/usr/bin/google-chrome: error while loading shared libraries: libpng14.so.14: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory after http://www.archlinux.org/news/libpnglibtiff-rebuilds-move-from-testing/ rebuild does not help :-(

<deleted-account> commented on 2012-01-24 08:50 (UTC)

Build error. http://pastebin.com/k5PwrkRd

<deleted-account> commented on 2012-01-24 08:50 (UTC)

Build error. http://pastebin.com/k5PwrkRd

t3ddy commented on 2012-01-14 09:29 (UTC)

Added man page. Now, I'll wait for a new release from Google to see what I've broken :)

Det commented on 2012-01-13 22:32 (UTC)

Would you?

t3ddy commented on 2012-01-13 22:15 (UTC)

Finally I've found the time to look at this. I've made script and template for rpm. There's one thing really strange: "chrome-sandbox" has wrong permissions, so I've to fix them in pkgbuild. Another thing: I've seen rpm's got also man page for chrome, shall I add it?

Det commented on 2012-01-13 15:26 (UTC)

@ruario, yeah, when it's extracting the sources. Just like it'd do with a regular tarball.

ruario commented on 2012-01-13 13:47 (UTC)

@t3ddy: actually it seems makepkg now opens rpms (using bsdtar) for you! ;)

« First ‹ Previous 1 .. 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 Next › Last »