Re: chromium detected as stripped

From: Otavio Salvador <otavio.salvador@ossystems.com.br>
To: Raphael Kubo da Costa <raphael.kubo.da.costa@intel.com>,
	 Carlos Rafael Giani <dv@pseudoterminal.org>,
	Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com>,
	Trevor Woerner <twoerner@gmail.com>
Cc: "openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org"
	<openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org>
Subject: Re: chromium detected as stripped
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2017 11:18:11 -0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAP9ODKrCcP62G1yH6Ww-4ApvEr_n6E0Neg-bkgAnWsNozn7=XQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87wp65rnfk.fsf@rkubodac-desk.ger.corp.intel.com>

Hello Raphael,

On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 10:05 AM, Raphael Kubo da Costa
<raphael.kubo.da.costa@intel.com> wrote:
> Otavio Salvador <otavio.salvador@ossystems.com.br> writes:
>
>>>> On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Jussi Kukkonen
>>>> <jussi.kukkonen@intel.com> wrote:
>>>>> On a related note, this good work is currently a bit hidden in
>>>>> meta-crosswalk -- is there a chance we could get this combined with
>>>>> meta-browser (or whatever place makes sense)? I know next to nothing about
>>>>> chromium packaging so CCing Raphael and the meta-browser maintainers for
>>>>> comments.
>>
>> Indeed it does sound like the proper workaround for now. That said,
>> I'd love to receive more help from meta-crosswalk people and avoid
>> duplication of work in packaging Chromium so I am adding Raphael on Cc
>> here so he can comment about how we can try to work together on this.
>
> The main reason why we haven't worked together yet is procrastination
> from my side :-)
>
> My recipe's working fine and is up-to-date with Chromium's stable
> releases, but I'd love to find a more permanent home for it and stop
> duplicating the efforts, especially as I spend most of my time working
> on Chromium itself, not its Yocto recipe or even Yocto in general.
>
> The main reason why I opted to start my recipe from scratch at the time
> was simplicity: the meta-browser repository used the same recipe for
> Chromium, CEF and Chromium with Ozone-Wayland, offered many different
> options and shipped quite a few patches that made updates quite
> difficult. My recipe is a lot less customizable, but OTOH that makes it
> quite easy to move to new Chromium milestones. If we're able to find a
> balance there, I definitely think we'd be able to get a lot more done
> together.

The newer releases do not require the Ozone patches, AFAIK, and in the
worse case, we can keep a version for CEF use if they don't match.

I think Carlos, Khem and Trevor would also be happy to help to test
and reviewing those patches. So please take a look and see if we can
avoid this duplication as it'd benefit a broader set of users.

-- 
Otavio Salvador                             O.S. Systems
http://www.ossystems.com.br        http://code.ossystems.com.br
Mobile: +55 (53) 9981-7854            Mobile: +1 (347) 903-9750