Installing Google Chrome on Clear Linux*

News and Announcements Tutorials and Guides
22

When I added Clear Linux repos to dnf caused headaches. I had to go back to the non dnf method

1 Like
23

I also prefer the rpm methode

24

Well if someone finds Chrome heavy on the RAM, I recommend Brave Browser for a lightweight one. I use it personally. Give it a try, it has suppport for Chrome extensions so you can get the chrome experience on it.

1 Like
25

It worked. But the fonts are messed up in Chrome.

Update: After reboot itā€™s all fine now. :slight_smile: Thank you!

26

I am getting
# Your connection is not private

Attackers might be trying to steal your information from  **gmail.com**  (for example, passwords, messages, or credit cards). [Learn more](chrome-error://chromewebdata/#)

NET::ERR_CERT_AUTHORITY_INVALID

kinkdly help.

1 Like
27

Iā€™m also affected by this issue. NET::ERR_CERT_AUTHORITY_INVALID

28

Same issue starting from this morning.

29

I had the same problem. Here the workaround: Browsers based on Chromium (Chrome & Brave) can't load Root Certs Ā· Issue #1843 Ā· clearlinux/distribution Ā· GitHub

cc: @rudrab @CochainComplex @Giacomo_S

1 Like
30

@jfexart Thank you - this solved my issue!

1 Like
31 
rpm -U --nodeps google-chrome*.rpm
/var/tmp/rpm-tmp.PXQYDO: line 614: /etc/default/google-chrome: No such file or directory
/var/tmp/rpm-tmp.PXQYDO: line 617: /etc/default/google-chrome: No such file or directory
warning: %post(google-chrome-stable-83.0.4103.97-1.x86_64) scriptlet failed, exit status 1

Any ideas?

32

Is chrome installed and working? It is only a warning. And not an unrecoverable one.

33

Got me thinking about a clever joke regarding ā€œ-Werrorā€, but I got nothing.

Anyway, so far itā€™s working fine.

34

Looks like someone is working on flatpaking Chrome via flathub, FYI: Chrome is now available through the flathub-beta repo : flatpak

Note that the flatpak version in CL is too old to handle this currently but looks like weā€™ll have a proper solution soon!

1 Like
35

I hope this is a good news.
Just for me to understand: Current procedure of installing Chrome, although not a native bundle, seems a general procedure to install software from rpm format and works very well.
Although easier, is flatpak format not considered inferior to the current process of installing from rpm?
Just trying to understandā€¦

36

The key (for me) will be upgrades, Iā€™m not going to manually unpack an RPM and run it from there, thatā€™s only a crutch to get it to work, which is fine when I have nothing else but, flatpak ships with CL by default so if an application is available there thatā€™s how Iā€™m going to use it, then Iā€™ll receive updates through the normal channels then I can stop worrying about it.

37

though not in a bundle, the rpm is certainly native. Bundles are built from upstream rpmā€™s, primarily. Flatpaks are not native, however an additional sandbox such as flatpak in some cases may be a good idae for your browser anyway. In other cases it may take a slight performance hit, and you may get some ram and disk bloat, and experience difficulties with it interfacing with native applications and drivers, well as trouble with gpu offloading, if you need that sort of thing.

1 Like
38

Thank you inmanturboā€¦
I think in another thread there was an extensive discussion where it has been agreed that the process of software install as published for Google Chrome is considered as preferred for install from rpm. At least one of recommended. Please correct me if I am wrongā€¦
If so then I do not care if I need to repeat install from time to time as long as I have native application. I do not expect CL to do it for me automatically and perhaps this is a better.
Flatpak appears to me an artificial environment that I would use if nothing else worked and I needed such software badly.

39

This looks like fun :wink:

40

itā€™s actually dnfupd now and the distro is called FaClearaDora. lol. Primarily backed by the Incorporated Foundation for Integrated Electronics in International Business Machines.

41

hey everyone

maybe someone is interested and trusts strangerā€™s binaries chromium-vaapi-85.0.4183.121-1.tar.xz

built natively on CL with all those fancy optimizations and with VAAPI support (hardware video acceleration), ffmpeg 4.3 with most codecs (not sure they needed for web). havent faced any issues so far on X11, on Wayland there can be problems with HW video decoding like black or white video frame or screen filled with colored blocks

  1. rename $HOME/.config/chromium (contain all your cookies/passwords/ā€¦) dir if u have one
  2. extract somewhere and run ./chromium-vaapi.sh