You are not logged in.

#1 2016-12-29 12:25:34

Dudl3y
Member
Registered: 2016-12-28
Posts: 49

Google Chrome vs Chromium

I'm new to ArchLinux, so I'm a neophyte. I saw on reddit people are using google-chrome from AUR instead of chromium from official repos.
This: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/google-chrome/ is considered as I can see safer, faster, and more stable browser than Chromium. Why? Why should someone use it instead of Chromium? I'd like to try it, but since I'm a kinda paranoid (xD) I'd like to check what it does install, and inspect this package decently. How can I? Or maybe a simpler question: is it 100% safe (included its dependencies) and 0% harmful (included its dependencies)?
Any suggestion is appreciated!

Last edited by Dudl3y (2016-12-29 12:26:58)

Offline

#2 2016-12-29 12:29:02

Trilby
Inspector Parrot
Registered: 2011-11-29
Posts: 22,284
Website

Re: Google Chrome vs Chromium

Dudl3y wrote:

[goog-chrome] is considered as I can see safer, faster, and more stable browser than Chromium.

By whom?

If you want to see what would be installed, build the package and look through it's contents in the pkg/google-chrome folder of wherever you built it.

Dudl3y wrote:

is it 100% safe (included its dependencies) and 0% harmful (included its dependencies)?

What would these even mean?  Nothing is 100% safe.  What would you consider safe?  What would you consider harmful?  Do you think chromium is 100% safe?


"UNIX is simple and coherent..." - Dennis Ritchie, "GNU's Not UNIX" -  Richard Stallman

Offline

#3 2016-12-29 12:29:26

graysky
Wiki Maintainer
From: :wq
Registered: 2008-12-01
Posts: 9,855
Website

Re: Google Chrome vs Chromium

Why would anyone consider a precompiled binary to be safer than one with open source?


CPU-optimized Linux-ck packages @ Repo-ck  • AUR packagesZsh and other configs

Offline

#4 2016-12-29 12:41:12

Dudl3y
Member
Registered: 2016-12-28
Posts: 49

Re: Google Chrome vs Chromium

Trilby wrote:
Dudl3y wrote:

[goog-chrome] is considered as I can see safer, faster, and more stable browser than Chromium.

By whom?

Description:    An attempt at creating a safer, faster, and more stable browser (Stable Channel)

Trilby wrote:

What would these even mean?  Nothing is 100% safe.  What would you consider safe?  What would you consider harmful?

I come from debian, I don't properly know how pacman and stuff work. But my friend told me to be more warned with AUR packages, because anyone can post sh.it in there.

Trilby wrote:

Do you think chromium is 100% safe?

Yes, because it's on official repos.

Offline

#5 2016-12-29 12:43:11

Lone_Wolf
Member
From: Netherlands, Europe
Registered: 2005-10-04
Posts: 7,370

Re: Google Chrome vs Chromium

pkgdesc="An attempt at creating a safer, faster, and more stable browser (Stable Channel)"

Sounds like an advertisement to me.

Do you trust google to do what's best for you even if that would be not-so-good for google ?
If your answer is yes, use google-chrome .


Multi-init booting with apg Openrc and systemd coexisting
Automounting : not needed, i prefer pmount
Aur helpers : makepkg + my own local repo === rarely need them

Offline

#6 2016-12-29 12:47:35

Trilby
Inspector Parrot
Registered: 2011-11-29
Posts: 22,284
Website

Re: Google Chrome vs Chromium

And the chromium description "... an attempt at creating a safer, faster, and more stable browser"

That is a chrom{e,ium} tag line.  It means nothing.  And it certainly doesn't differentiate one as more safe, fast, or stable than the other as they both have that exact same tagline.

Cynical note: even if there were 100% truth-in-advertising, that tagline only says that it is an attempt, there is no claim to success.


"UNIX is simple and coherent..." - Dennis Ritchie, "GNU's Not UNIX" -  Richard Stallman

Offline

#7 2016-12-29 13:22:09

Dudl3y
Member
Registered: 2016-12-28
Posts: 49

Re: Google Chrome vs Chromium

Trilby wrote:

And the chromium description "... an attempt at creating a safer, faster, and more stable browser"

That is a chrom{e,ium} tag line.  It means nothing.  And it certainly doesn't differentiate one as more safe, fast, or stable than the other as they both have that exact same tagline.

Cynical note: even if there were 100% truth-in-advertising, that tagline only says that it is an attempt, there is no claim to success.

Lone_Wolf wrote:

pkgdesc="An attempt at creating a safer, faster, and more stable browser (Stable Channel)"

Sounds like an advertisement to me.

Do you trust google to do what's best for you even if that would be not-so-good for google ?
If your answer is yes, use google-chrome .

I'd just like to test google-chrome and benchmark both them, to see which one is most efficient. To know what does this package do when installed, what should I do? The whole package should be a script which downloads from google.com Chrome for Linux. Am I right? https://aur.archlinux.org/cgit/aur.git/ … gle-chrome - is this all?

Offline

#8 2016-12-29 13:24:59

Trilby
Inspector Parrot
Registered: 2011-11-29
Posts: 22,284
Website

Re: Google Chrome vs Chromium

Dudl3y wrote:

I'd just like to test google-chrome and benchmark both them, to see which one is most efficient.

Ok, why didn't you start with this.  Install them both.  Then run your benchmarks.


"UNIX is simple and coherent..." - Dennis Ritchie, "GNU's Not UNIX" -  Richard Stallman

Offline

#9 2016-12-29 13:26:02

Dudl3y
Member
Registered: 2016-12-28
Posts: 49

Re: Google Chrome vs Chromium

@Trilby did you read my other questions?

Offline

#10 2016-12-29 13:26:53

Gusar
Member
Registered: 2009-08-25
Posts: 3,604

Re: Google Chrome vs Chromium

Chrome is Chromium with a crash reporter and user metrics reporting. Oh, and a colorful logo instead of a blue one. That's it, the rest is the same. Any minor differences in performance, that you won't notice outside of the number a benchmark spits out, come from using a different compiler version or different compiler (gcc vs. clang).

Offline

#11 2016-12-29 13:31:02

Trilby
Inspector Parrot
Registered: 2011-11-29
Posts: 22,284
Website

Re: Google Chrome vs Chromium

I read your other questions - but they don't have any meaning.  You linked to a PKGBUILD and asked if that's all that's in the package.  No, that's what's used to build the package.


"UNIX is simple and coherent..." - Dennis Ritchie, "GNU's Not UNIX" -  Richard Stallman

Offline

#12 2016-12-29 13:36:21

Buddlespit
Member
From: Chesapeake, Va.
Registered: 2014-02-07
Posts: 450

Re: Google Chrome vs Chromium

I understand that you're coming from a distro that did everything for you. Here, YOU have to decide what's best for you and your system. Personally, I try to do everything through the official channels. I avoided as much as I could (and still do) whatever was in the AUR. I still have AUR packages installed (22 to be exact), but I learned how to figure out what I needed and how to build packages and how to make sure I wasn't downloading and building sourcecode for a rootkit.
Sorry, I'm trying to be friendly, and I'm sure I'm coming off like a distro hardass. What I'm trying to say is : learn your system and learn the build system. Learn how to read and manipulate a PKGBUILD to your best interests. If you're concerned about using an AUR package, only YOU will be able to track and answer your concerns.

BTW, here's a decent read on the differences between Chromium and Chrome: What’s the Difference Between Chromium and Chrome?. I use Chrome once I figured out that I was doing everything I could to make Chromium Chrome.


AMD Ryzen 7 1700X | Asus PRIME X370-A | GeForce GTX 980 Ti | 16G Ram | KDE Plasma | Zen Kernel
Until linuxcounter.com closed, I was registered linux user #560427

Offline

#13 2016-12-29 13:47:40

Dudl3y
Member
Registered: 2016-12-28
Posts: 49

Re: Google Chrome vs Chromium

Trilby wrote:

I read your other questions - but they don't have any meaning.  You linked to a PKGBUILD and asked if that's all that's in the package.  No, that's what's used to build the package.

Then is this all:

google-chrome-stable.sh
google-chrome-stable_55.0.2883.87_amd64.deb
https://www.google.com/chrome/browser/privacy/eula_text.html
StartupWMClass-and-GNOME3-context-menu.patch

?

Offline

#14 2016-12-29 13:57:07

Trilby
Inspector Parrot
Registered: 2011-11-29
Posts: 22,284
Website

Re: Google Chrome vs Chromium

No that is what is used to build the package.

Trilby wrote:

If you want to see what would be installed, build the package and look through it's contents in the pkg/google-chrome folder of wherever you built it.


"UNIX is simple and coherent..." - Dennis Ritchie, "GNU's Not UNIX" -  Richard Stallman

Offline

#15 2016-12-29 14:15:42

Dudl3y
Member
Registered: 2016-12-28
Posts: 49

Re: Google Chrome vs Chromium

Trilby wrote:

No that is what is used to build the package.

Trilby wrote:

If you want to see what would be installed, build the package and look through it's contents in the pkg/google-chrome folder of wherever you built it.

I did a makepkg, this is the result:

eula_text.html
google-chrome-55.0.2883.87-1-x86_64.pkg.tar.xz
google-chrome.install
google-chrome-stable_55.0.2883.87_amd64.deb
google-chrome-stable.sh
pkg
PKGBUILD
src
StartupWMClass-and-GNOME3-context-menu.patch

now, do I need to open everything as possible I need with nano to check? Otherwise, I need to trust Google, because the ones which I can't read are prebuilt binaries. Right?

Offline

#16 2016-12-29 14:21:11

Trilby
Inspector Parrot
Registered: 2011-11-29
Posts: 22,284
Website

Re: Google Chrome vs Chromium

Once again:

Trilby wrote:

If you want to see what would be installed, build the package and look through it's contents in the pkg/google-chrome folder of wherever you built it.

Dudl3y wrote:

now, do I need to open everything as possible I need with nano to check?

What exactly are you checking for?  What do you think you will be able to see when you open a file in nano?  If it's a text file, you'll see the text ... but what would be a good outcome, what would be a bad outcome?  What - in a plain text file - could give you confidence in a built package?  What would give you concern?  As you note the things you should be concerned about definitely cannot be checked with a text editor.

But you had asked how to see what would be installed.  Don't use a text editor, use `ls` and you'll see what will be installed.

If you want a better answer, ask a better question.  What are you really trying to figure out?


"UNIX is simple and coherent..." - Dennis Ritchie, "GNU's Not UNIX" -  Richard Stallman

Offline

#17 2016-12-29 14:25:58

Dudl3y
Member
Registered: 2016-12-28
Posts: 49

Re: Google Chrome vs Chromium

Trilby wrote:

Once again:

Trilby wrote:

If you want to see what would be installed, build the package and look through it's contents in the pkg/google-chrome folder of wherever you built it.

cd pkg/google-chrome
ls
nano ...
nano ...
so - lemme repeat the question once again: now, do I need to open everything as possible I need with nano to check? Otherwise, I need to trust Google, because the ones which I can't read are prebuilt binaries. Right?

Offline

#18 2016-12-29 14:27:18

Trilby
Inspector Parrot
Registered: 2011-11-29
Posts: 22,284
Website

Re: Google Chrome vs Chromium

To check for WHAT?  What do you want to check?  What the hell are you trying to do?!

Nevermind.  I give up.  This is hopeless.

Gusar gave a good answer to the differences between chromium and google-chrome.  You seem to be looking for something else though, and despite trying to drag it out of you, I have no idea what it is you are looking for.


"UNIX is simple and coherent..." - Dennis Ritchie, "GNU's Not UNIX" -  Richard Stallman

Offline

#19 2016-12-29 14:34:19

TheChickenMan
Member
From: United States
Registered: 2015-07-25
Posts: 353

Re: Google Chrome vs Chromium

Dudl3y wrote:

so - lemme repeat the question once again: now, do I need to open everything as possible I need with nano to check? Otherwise, I need to trust Google, because the ones which I can't read are prebuilt binaries. Right?

You can open google-chrome-55.0.2883.87-1-x86_64.pkg.tar.xz with an archive manager to see the structure of what is in the package and where it will be installed. You can read the PKGBUILD to see where the stuff that was used to build that package came from. Yes, since this package contains downloaded binaries you just need to trust Google.


If quantum mechanics hasn't profoundly shocked you, you haven't understood it yet.
Niels Bohr

Offline

#20 2016-12-29 14:36:55

Dudl3y
Member
Registered: 2016-12-28
Posts: 49

Re: Google Chrome vs Chromium

Trilby wrote:

To check for WHAT?  What do you want to check?  What the hell are you trying to do?!

I need to check the content to see if I'm building a malware, as @ Buddlesplit said properly. It's for future purposes, because I'm going to do the samething for some packages like i3-gaps/i3/spotify and many others I'm setupping and I don't want to open another discussion.

Now, do I need to open everything as possible I need with nano to check? Otherwise, I need to trust Google, because the ones which I can't read are prebuilt binaries. Right?

If you'll reply me, you'll also answer me some doubts I have in other contexts, i3, i3-gaps, spotishit and many other, and I'll do so. I actually know there is no rootkit (-.-) on google chrome

Offline

#21 2016-12-29 14:51:28

Trilby
Inspector Parrot
Registered: 2011-11-29
Posts: 22,284
Website

Re: Google Chrome vs Chromium

Dudl3y wrote:

I need to check the content to see if I'm building a malware

This is my point.  How do you think you will do this?  What do you think you will see when you open a file in nano that will identify it as malware or confirm that it is not malware?  This is a hypothetical question as there is nothing you'd see.


"UNIX is simple and coherent..." - Dennis Ritchie, "GNU's Not UNIX" -  Richard Stallman

Offline

#22 2016-12-29 15:12:42

Dudl3y
Member
Registered: 2016-12-28
Posts: 49

Re: Google Chrome vs Chromium

Trilby wrote:
Dudl3y wrote:

I need to check the content to see if I'm building a malware

This is my point.  How do you think you will do this?  What do you think you will see when you open a file in nano that will identify it as malware or confirm that it is not malware?  This is a hypothetical question as there is nothing you'd see.

Oh... Is there a way to do it?

Offline

#23 2016-12-29 15:15:10

Trilby
Inspector Parrot
Registered: 2011-11-29
Posts: 22,284
Website

Re: Google Chrome vs Chromium

To know if something is 100% safe?  No.

To learn about packaging and think critically about sources?  Yes.  But this is a process, not a single step of "open some file in editor and then you're safe".


"UNIX is simple and coherent..." - Dennis Ritchie, "GNU's Not UNIX" -  Richard Stallman

Offline

#24 2016-12-29 22:02:05

seth
Member
Registered: 2012-09-03
Posts: 12,937

Re: Google Chrome vs Chromium

@Dudl3y
You encouraged to first inspect the PKGBUILD (with the editor of your choice and that should not be nano ;-), but you can already do this online https://aur.archlinux.org/cgit/aur.git/ … gle-chrome
It tells you that a debian package is fetched from httpS://dl.google.com, unpacked and transformed into a pacman package.
This is as safe as you trust google, your network and your box - no more, no less. And it's as much as you can figure. Chrome isn't opensource (unlike chromium) - if you want to know what it does, google for wireshark.

Chrome is no malware but has tracking habits and *certainly* has bugs since *everything* beyond "hello_world.c" has bugs and anything that has bugs is not safe.
Welcome to life smile

Offline

#25 2016-12-29 23:12:35

eschwartz
Trusted User/Bug Wrangler
Registered: 2014-08-08
Posts: 2,853

Re: Google Chrome vs Chromium

And even hello_world.c has been known to be buggy on occasion. wink


Managing AUR repos The Right Way -- aurpublish (now a standalone tool)

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB