Google Chrome 64-bit packages - [CLOSED]

[Mike Walsh]

***NEW VERSION***

Evening, all.

The current stable version, 59.0.3071.86, released yesterday, is now available for download from the usual location.

https://www.mediafire.com/folder/l8lkuo ... S_packages

Details of 'fixes' available here, for those interested in such things:-

https://chromereleases.googleblog.com/

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Details for the first-time enabling of the new PepperFlash update system can be found here:-

http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewto ... 393#928393

There's a shed-load of 'fixes' in this new release; more so than usual. One interesting feature is that Chrome can now run in what's called 'headless' mode, for devs who want to test out code without running the UI.

Have fun.


Mike.

[orrin]

Evening, all.

The current stable version, 59.0.3071.86, released yesterday, is now available for download from the usual location.

For some reason, version 59 will not start in my Slacko 64-6.3.2!

I went back to version 58!

[jake29]

Cannot start 59.0.3071.86 (Slacko64 build) in Fatdog64. No issues with previous versions.

Code: Select all

# google-chrome
/usr/bin/google-chrome: error while loading shared libraries: libgtk-3.so.0: wrong ELF class: ELFCLASS32

[Mike Walsh]

@ orrin, jake29:-

Hm. Odd. I've been 'beta' testing Chrome 59 till very recently, and it's been running perfectly in Slacko64 (though my version is the original 6.3.0). There could be a different layout for some things in 6.3.2; that's the UEFI version, isn't it?

@Jake:-

Libgtk-3.so.0... You're running FatDog, yes? My guess is you've got the same problem that exists in Slacko64. In Tahr, /usr/lib64 is symlinked into /usr/lib.....so any 64-bit ELF will show up in both directories. Slacko, on the other hand, doesn't have this sym-link.....so libs must go into the correct directory to start with. I always have this problem when I'm constructing .pets or SFS packages for both of these 64-bit Pups; if there's any scripts involved that call for libs in one location or the other, I always have to write the Slacko version differently to the Tahr version, to take account of this.

Have a look in /usr/lib, and in /usr/lib64. Check 'Properties for libgtk-3.so.0, when you find it.....and let me know what ELF class each one gives, please? You may need to add a sym-link in for libgtk-3.so.0, though I'm surprised that it's suddenly giving problems with this release, especially given that the beta of 59 has worked flawlessly.

The problem being, of course, that there's no way to open up the Chrome binary in opt/google/chrome, to see what paths they've coded into it..... If there is, I don't know how you do this, I'm afraid.


Mike.

[jake29]

@Jake:-

Libgtk-3.so.0... You're running FatDog, yes? My guess is you've got the same problem that exists in Slacko64. In Tahr, /usr/lib64 is symlinked into /usr/lib.....so any 64-bit ELF will show up in both directories. Slacko, on the other hand, doesn't have this sym-link.....so libs must go into the correct directory to start with. I always have this problem when I'm constructing .pets or SFS packages for both of these 64-bit Pups; if there's any scripts involved that call for libs in one location or the other, I always have to write the Slacko version differently to the Tahr version, to take account of this.

Have a look in /usr/lib, and in /usr/lib64. Check 'Properties for libgtk-3.so.0, when you find it.....and let me know what ELF class each one gives, please? You may need to add a sym-link in for libgtk-3.so.0, though I'm surprised that it's suddenly giving problems with this release, especially given that the beta of 59 has worked flawlessly.

Yes, I'm running the latest Fatdog64 (v710).

Code: Select all

# file libgdk-3.so.0
libgdk-3.so.0: symbolic link to libgdk-3.so.0.1800.7
# file libgdk-3.so.0.1800.7
libgdk-3.so.0.1800.7: ELF 32-bit LSB shared object, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked, stripped

libgtk-3.so.0 exists in /usr/lib, but not /usr/lib64. Adding it to the latter returns the same error.

[Mike Walsh]

@jake29:-

Now I'm confused. I thought the problem was with libgtk-3.so.0, not libgdk-3.so.0..?


Mike.

[jake29]

@jake29:-

Now I'm confused. I thought the problem was with libgtk-3.so.0, not libgdk-3.so.0..?

Apologies, it's late here - must be half-asleep.

Code: Select all

# file libgtk-3.so.0
libgtk-3.so.0: symbolic link to libgtk-3.so.0.1800.7
# file libgtk-3.so.0.1800.7
libgtk-3.so.0.1800.7: ELF 32-bit LSB shared object, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked, stripped

Same info applies:
libgtk-3.so.0 exists in /usr/lib, but not /usr/lib64. Adding it to the latter returns the same error.

[orrin]

@ orrin, jake29:-
Hm. Odd. I've been 'beta' testing Chrome 59 till very recently, and it's been running perfectly in Slacko64 (though my version is the original 6.3.0). There could be a different layout for some things in 6.3.2; that's the UEFI version, isn't it?

What is UEFI ?

[jake29]

@SFR has provided the solution over at: http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewto ... &start=450

Beginning with Chrome v59.x, GTK+3 is required.

[Mike Walsh]

Hi, Jake.

Ah, glad you've got it resolved. Y'see, I wasn't even aware of this, as both Tahr64 and Slacko64 have the 64-bit libgtk-3.so.0 installed by default.....so of course, the problem never showed up for me..!

I had a feeling this was a system issue, rather than an application one.

Thanks for getting back to me over this, and thanks also for making me aware of the GTK 3+ issue. Cheers.


Mike.

[orrin]

@SFR has provided the solution over at: http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewto ... &start=450

Beginning with Chrome v59.x, GTK+3 is required.

That's probably why the Gimp software that Mike suggested, also did not run on my system!

[Mike Walsh]

@SFR has provided the solution over at: http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewto ... &start=450

Beginning with Chrome v59.x, GTK+3 is required.

That's probably why the Gimp software that Mike suggested, also did not run on my system!

Mm. That's quite possible, actually. Linux is steadily moving over to GTK3. The old GTK2 has been a staple, core part of the 'X' graphics rendering system for some years, now; witness all the problems that were raised when FireFox 49 first showed up, with GTK3 suddenly incorporated by default.

Remember, the Puppy Forums were buzzing like a hornet's nest for a few weeks until 'workarounds' were proposed, coded, tested....and finally accepted as being 'the solution'. I ought to have anticipated this, if I'm honest.....

Never mind. At least we're now aware of it.....again! Thanks for the 'prompt', orrin. It could also be why the VLC AppImage refuses to 'play ball'...


Mike.

[Mike Walsh]

@orrin:-

What is UEFI?

Have a look here:-

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_E ... _Interface

To put it in a nutshell, it's what's replaced the BIOS on more modern machines. Microsoft have further developed things to give the 'Fast Startup' (the machine doesn't shut-down, it hibernates instead) and also the 'Secure Boot' (which won't allow anything to boot unless it has a signed certificate from M$ themselves). Nice little earner for them, 'cos anybody who wants to develop an OS that'll run on modern hardware has no choice but to fork out $99 to MS for the privilege of doing so.....it simply won't boot otherwise.

Cheeky buggers. Supposedly it's in the interests of security; without the UEFI 'shim', as it's called, a modern computer will see any Linux OS as malware.....unless you go through all the hoops required to turn it off. On the very newest machines you can't even do this.


Mike.

[orrin]

Have a look here:-

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_E ... _Interface

Thanks Mike.... more information than I really needed.....(grin)

[Mike Walsh]

Ah, well.....there you go. I've often been accused of going OTT..!

You can't say you don't know now.


Mike.

[Mike Walsh]

Evening, all.

Currently 'beta-testing' Chrome 60.0.3112.24. Everything, so far, is dead-centre 'on the green'.

29/06/17:- Now on 60.0.3112.50; still trouble-free.

Looking good.


Mike.

[Mike Walsh]

I think I spoke too soon.

I produce, as you know, Chrome packages for both Tahr64 and Slacko64.....although I'm running the original Slacko64, 6.3.0.

I've been spending a lot of time in Tahr64 lately, and the upgrade from the earlier 60 'Beta' to this current version was hassle-free. I've booted into Slacko64 for the first time in over a week.....and now Chrome won't start. It has an

Code: Select all

undefined_symbol_lookup_error

Seems to be something to do with the

Code: Select all

gdk_screen_authentication_factor

????

Seems it's possible that I won't be able to produce the Slacko package any more.....unless I get to the bottom of this fairly pronto. Chrome 60 'stable' will be out in a couple more weeks, so.....

Any ideas, anyone?


Mike.

[snayak]

Hi,

I am running on little older Fatdog 611.
Tried google-chrome-09042016-x86_64-official.sfs from
http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewto ... 966#921966.
It didn't work. Shows error.
Chrome available from Fatdog 611's repository is bit old one too. Version 29.0.
Is there anywhere a newer Chrome available that runs on Fatdog 611?

Kindly help.

Sincerely,
Srinivas Nayak

[Mike Walsh]

Hallo, snayak.

My guess is that you need the GTK 3.0 stuff installed into FatDog. Chrome introduced the requirement for this a couple of releases ago. Further back in this thread, there is a link to a how-to.

I don't normally keep older stuff; only the current version, and the one immediately before it. But because I'm in a good mood today, and these don't take long, I've put this together specially for you. Please understand; I don't make a habit of doing this!! Give this a try, and see if it works for you. It's the 64-bit version of Chrome 48. I still use the 32-bit version of this, and it functions fine.

http://www.datafilehost.com/d/224d86a1

Let me know how it goes, please.


Mike.

[snayak]

Dear Mike,

I am very much thankful for your help. It is my greatest pleasure that I received your kind favor. Being in open source world for more than fifteen years, I very much understand and respect all our friend's good wishes, help and support. Such generous help must never be taken for granted and should never be demanded just for building special packages.

Glad to download the sfs. Tried on my puppy. It gives me the same error which google-chrome-09042016-x86_64-official.sfs gave me.

Code: Select all

~# google-chrome 
/usr/bin/google-chrome: symbol lookup error: /usr/bin/google-chrome: undefined symbol: gconf_client_get_default
~# 

It seems I am missing some library.
Can you guess anything from this error message?
Looks like libgconf issue. But didn't get any such package in Fatdog repo. Guess of any solution?

By the way, from your post from https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/forums ... -of-puppy/ I got link for Chrome 48 for 32bit OS. Downloading it to try. Will let you know if it works.


Sincerely,
Srinivas Nayak