Package Details: google-chrome 129.0.6668.58-1

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: 2236
Popularity: 7.34
First Submitted: 2010-05-25 20:25 (UTC)
Last Updated: 2024-09-17 21:41 (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When reporting this package as outdated make sure there is indeed a new version for Linux Desktop.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 .. 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 .. 157 Next › Last »

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 The URLs are out of date.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Package out of date.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.

« First ‹ Previous 1 .. 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 .. 157 Next › Last »