[oe] [meta-browser][PATCH] chromium: 52.0.2743.76 -> 54.0.2810.2

[Fathi Boudra]

Hi Trevor,

On 6 April 2017 at 23:37, Trevor Woerner <twoerner at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 3:31 AM, Martin Jansa <martin.jansa at gmail.com> wrote:
>> In my world build it (surprisingly) didn't fail, good job Trevor!
>
> Sadly, it does fail with one specific PACKAGECONFIG: ignore-lost-context
>
> I have a fix which I've build-tested both for x11 and wayland with a
> bunch of different targets, which is just waiting for run-testing:
> https://github.com/twoerner/meta-browser/tree/contrib/twoerner/chromium_54_pkgconfig_fix
>
>> Are you willing to check 2 QA issues which might be there in older version
>> as well?
>>
>> chromium-54.0.2810.2: ELF binary
>> '/tmp/work/i586-oe-linux/chromium/54.0.2810.2-r0/packages-split/chromium/usr/bin/chromium/chrome'
>> has relocations in .text [textrel]
>> chromium-wayland-53.0.2785.143: ELF binary
>> '/tmp/work/i586-oe-linux/chromium-wayland/53.0.2785.143-r0/packages-split/chromium-wayland/usr/bin/chromium/chrome'
>> has relocations in .text [textrel]
>
> Yes, I'll have a look.
>
> Currently I'm trying to figure out how to move past this version.
> After 53.0.2810.2 the current method OE uses to build chromium starts
> to fail because (as is my understanding) it was around this point that
> the chromium build switched from gyp+ninja (what we're using in OE) to
> gn+ninja (ninja is like "make" and gyp/gn are like the autotools)
> Therefore the gyp support starts to break down due to lack of upstream
> maintainership. I'm starting to be able to do successful chromium
> builds from tarballs on the cmdline (outside of OE) up to
> 57.0.2987.133 but I need to figure out how to translate that into a
> recipe.

I think Zoltan looked into it at some point but I can't remember what
was the outcome...

> Oh, and it'd be nice to have an aarch64 build too.

Andrey in CC is looking at submitting the changes needed to get Aarch64 added.

Cheers,
Fathi