Chrome vs. Chromium in Ubuntu

Discussion in 'all things UNIX' started by tlu, Dec 11, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. tlu

    tlu Guest

    I'm afraid that I'm not yet sure how Google Chrome really differs from Chromium in Linux, specifically in Ubuntu. This site shows the differences between both variants. However, it seems that that table is not quite reliable. It says, e.g., that for Adobe flash Chrome has its "custom (non-free) plugin included in release". But if I uninstall the adobe-flashplugin package, flash in Chrome doesn't work - it obviously doesn't have its own plugin included. It has its own PDF viewer, though.

    The sandbox is, as the table says for Ubuntu, enabled in both according to chrome://sandbox.

    One difference which I found: In chrome://flash Chromium has the warning: "GPU access is not allowed" while Chrome doesn't show that.

    Can someone with more knowledge about Chrome/Chromium enlighten me?
     
  2. vasa1

    vasa1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2010
    Posts:
    4,152
    Hmmm ....

    Anyway, here's my about:chrome:
    Code:
    [B]Google Chrome[/B] 15.0.874.121 (Official Build 109964)
    [B]OS[/B] Linux
    [B]WebKit[/B] 535.2 (@100034)
    [B]JavaScript[/B] V8 3.5.10.24
    [B]Flash[/B] 11.1 r102
    [B]User Agent[/B] Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686) AppleWebKit/535.2 (KHTML, like Gecko) Ubuntu/11.10 Chrome/15.0.874.121 Safari/535.2
    [B]Command Line[/B] /opt/google/chrome/google-chrome --new-window --user-agent=Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686) AppleWebKit/535.2 (KHTML, like Gecko) Ubuntu/11.10 Chrome/15.0.874.121 Safari/535.2 --flag-switches-begin --enable-click-to-play --flag-switches-end
    [B]Executable Path[/B] /opt/google/chrome/google-chrome
    Profile Path /home/vasa1/.config/google-chrome/Default
    and a pic of my plug-in page (Ubuntu 11.10 fully updated)
     

    Attached Files:

    • tlu.png
      tlu.png
      File size:
      62.5 KB
      Views:
      3,170
  3. tlu

    tlu Guest

    @vasa1:

    Interesting! In my case both Chrome and Chromium use /usr/lib/adobe-flashplugin/libflashplayer.so. I should add that I installed Chrome using the deb file from here. Perhaps this makes a difference?

    BTW: about:plugins for Chrome:

    Chrome_plugins.jpg

    EDIT: about:chrome doesn't work here neither for Chrome nor for Chromium. They say "website not available". Funny ...
     
  4. Ocky

    Ocky Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2006
    Posts:
    2,677
    Location:
    George, S.Africa
    With your permission, may I post your query on our local forum ?
     
  5. tlu

    tlu Guest

    Sure, no problem, Ocky :thumb:
     
  6. vasa1

    vasa1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2010
    Posts:
    4,152
    This is what my ppa shows: http://dl.google.com/linux/chrome/deb/. Could that make a diff?
     
    Last edited: Dec 11, 2011
  7. tlu

    tlu Guest

    This site doesn't exist for me:

    chrome.png

    EDIT: I have the same entry in my repos. But why did you obviously get a diiferent version than me?
     
  8. vasa1

    vasa1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2010
    Posts:
    4,152
    But that's not the full url?

    Sorry! I now seem to recall that I went via the Ubuntu Software Centre and not by typing in the url directly. I'm not 100% sure but I think that that's how I did it.
     
  9. vasa1

    vasa1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2010
    Posts:
    4,152
  10. tlu

    tlu Guest

    No, obviously ony the second part :D I had clicked the URL you mentioned.
     
  11. tlu

    tlu Guest

  12. vasa1

    vasa1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2010
    Posts:
    4,152
    Then I don't know what to say. Ocky might come up with something :D
     
  13. Ocky

    Ocky Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2006
    Posts:
    2,677
    Location:
    George, S.Africa
    Let's see if the local forum blokes come up with something useful. I am of course not a regular Chrome or Chromium user, but I have Chromium installed in Ubuntu 10.04.
    The flash path is as per tlu's viz. /usr/lib/adobe-flashplugin/libflashplayer.so

    chrome://version
    =
    chrome version.jpg
     
  14. tlu

    tlu Guest

    vasa1, just an idea: Had you downloaded the 32 bit or the 64 bit version? Perhaps only the 32 bit version includes flash as the 64 bit flash version is still rather new ....
     
  15. vasa1

    vasa1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2010
    Posts:
    4,152
    Absolutely spot on. I'm still 32 bit!
     
  16. tlu

    tlu Guest

    Ah - I guess that explains it!
     
  17. Ocky

    Ocky Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2006
    Posts:
    2,677
    Location:
    George, S.Africa
    tlu, have a look here

    and in about:flags

    Is GPU Accelerated Compositing and/or GPU Accelerated Canvas 2D turned on in? If it is, try turning it off. If it isn't, try turning it on.

    If you change any settings in the about:flags page, make sure to restart Chrome.

    (Still waiting for someone to bite in local forum)

    Try chrome://version

    This is a great extension .. https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/aeoigbhkilbllfomkmmilbfochhlgdmh?hl=en (ChromeAccess)
     
    Last edited: Dec 11, 2011
  18. tlu

    tlu Guest


    Thanks, but shouldn't that mean that Chrome uses its internal flash plugin if I remove adobe-flashplugin? As mentioned, it doesn't.

    I did that (the second entry didn't show up here in Chromium 17 but rather Overwrite Software Rendering List) - and now that warning has vanished :thumb:

    Yes, that works!

    Yeah, that's really useful. Thanks for your help, Ocky :thumb:
     
  19. tlu

    tlu Guest

    As mentioned in my previous post, the internal flash plugin is not used - and it even shows up in about:plugins. The qustion remains if Chrome/Chromium also sandboxes external flash plugins.

    chrome://sandbox says both in Chrome and Chromium:

    sandbox.png

    ... whatever that means. ;)

    vasa1, is this different to the 32 bit version?
     
  20. vasa1

    vasa1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2010
    Posts:
    4,152
    Tlu, this is what I see:
     
  21. Ocky

    Ocky Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2006
    Posts:
    2,677
    Location:
    George, S.Africa
    tlu, yes I just wanted to highlight what you have said should be the case but isn't. :'(

    Have you tried adding this flag to use the internal flash ? --enable-internal-flash No,
    as it should be enabled by default, so probably not the right thing to do.

    As I mentioned I don't run Chrome only Chromium in Ubuntu 10.04 - maybe I will install it
    in Kubuntu 11.10 to see what's going on. :thumb:
     
    Last edited: Dec 12, 2011
  22. Hungry Man

    Hungry Man Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2011
    Posts:
    9,148
    Chrome supports some codecs that Chromium doesn't.

    I forget the other differences on Linux.
     
  23. vasa1

    vasa1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2010
    Posts:
    4,152
    Tlu, I'm not getting this ^^^. In the attachment of your plug-ins, there's just the one generic Flash plug-in. So how can the internal flash plug-in function since it isn't there?
     
  24. tlu

    tlu Guest

    Absolutely, that' what I was trying to say ;) (BTW: I made a typo in post #19. It should read: ... it even doesn't show up in about:plugins). I just wanted to clarify that it contradicts what Adobe says.
     
  25. Ocky

    Ocky Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2006
    Posts:
    2,677
    Location:
    George, S.Africa
    Yes, it definitely looks like the internal flash player is only bundled with the 32 bit version of Chrome - I have just checked after installing Chrome in Kubuntu 11.10.
    Am I correct in saying that the 3rd party plugins are not sandboxed, but can be
    sandboxed by adding the --safe-plugins flag ? (I have added this flag to Chromium - there are no issues at all)

    You see, by default, I don't think plugins are sandboxed and that would include the external flash player from Adobe.

    Hmm.. now back to Opera :D
     
    Last edited: Dec 12, 2011
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.