Package Details: midori-git 11.6.r23.gcc19b4f-1

Git Clone URL: https://aur.archlinux.org/midori-git.git (read-only, click to copy)
Package Base: midori-git
Description: Web browser based on Floorp
Upstream URL: https://github.com/goastian/midori-desktop
Licenses: MPL-2.0
Conflicts: midori
Provides: midori
Submitter: SolarAquarion
Maintainer: xiota
Last Packager: xiota
Votes: 148
Popularity: 0.000000
First Submitted: 2018-10-28 14:20 (UTC)
Last Updated: 2025-08-26 02:49 (UTC)

Dependencies (43)

Required by (14)

Sources (2)

Pinned Comments

xiota commented on 2024-01-18 05:33 (UTC) (edited on 2025-08-26 00:42 (UTC) by xiota)

Midori 11.x.y is based on Floorp.

If you have problems building, try building in a clean chroot.

Avoid flagging and commenting at the same time for the same issue.

  • Flag for common issues with standard solutions, like depends or submodule changes.
  • Comment for issues requiring explanation or debugging.
  • Use a pastebin for blocks of text more than a few lines.

Latest Comments

1 2 3 4 5 6 .. 10 Next › Last »

konvix commented on 2026-02-18 03:25 (UTC)

Saw maintainer (Astian) active and promoting on their social account today talking about their strong commitment to users. A reach-out asking them how this squares with 6 months without backporting security updates and asking them to at minimum communicate about the known vulnerabilities to users received this reply:

Hello, thank you for your interest in Midori. Yes, Midori is our main project, and we will continue to maintain it. However, we are currently developing an efficient and effective way to keep Midori updated and add our privacy features, while disabling all AI options. Users will have the option to enable them if they wish. Of course, we will continue to support and improve Midori; in fact, what's coming is fantastic.

konvix commented on 2026-02-17 12:20 (UTC) (edited on 2026-02-19 00:33 (UTC) by konvix)

Upstream has not had any updates since 2025-08. The ESR128 branch pointed to by this -git package is based in Firefox ESR 128, which was deprecated by Mozilla 2025-09 and is by now affected by dozens of unfixed CVEs, some of which exploited in wild.

Besides, the package won't even build without additional patches as of python 3.14. For anyone still attempting, I guess patches for esr140 in firefox-esr/icecat/konform-browser packages should do most of it for esr128.

Considered flagging this package but technically it is still up to date with the out-of-date browser.

Maybe maintainer wants to pin an advisory or reconsider the package.

maaarghk commented on 2024-03-19 17:21 (UTC) (edited on 2024-03-19 17:23 (UTC) by maaarghk)

I think you would satisfy the maximum number of people by pointing this back at midori-browser even though the webkit version is totally unmaintained, this basically is now a completely different piece of software than it was before. I don't really think it's appropriate to change this to point at a totally different piece of software than it was pointing to before after several years even if a company recycled the name and abandoned the first. I don't know if the Arch guidelines say about this. But as someone who had it installed my expectation was to have (and continue to have) webkit based browser to test things with, not to get some shitty Firefox fork.

Besides, the astian people seem like they would be happier maintaining their own AUR package, if they could even manage to follow the rules for long enough to get it submitted.

edit: acht, I see PKGBUILD.midori-classic in the midori package. It'll do.

SolarAquarion commented on 2024-02-02 01:17 (UTC)

@ponchale When creating a package description for a package, do not include the package name in a self-referencing way. For example, "Nedit is a text editor for X11" could be simplified to "A text editor for X11". Also try to keep the descriptions to ~80 characters or less.

private and secure browser forked from Floorp

ponchale commented on 2024-02-02 00:44 (UTC)

What different name do you propose that does not violate Arch Linux's AUR policies?

ponchale commented on 2024-02-02 00:41 (UTC)

We do not request a version change, we request a description change in the package. Making reference to this is something totally incomprehensible given that how do you think we should refer to Midori? I am part of the group that developed Midori 7 and 9 as well as the team that develops the current version of Midori. How do you think we should refer to Midori?

Ok Since it seems that the conflict is generated by the description of Midori Web Browser by Astian, a more consistent description that allows us to differentiate.

1 2 3 4 5 6 .. 10 Next › Last »