Forums
New posts
Search forums
News
Security News
Technology News
Giveaways
Giveaways, Promotions and Contests
Discounts & Deals
Reviews
Users Reviews
Video Reviews
Support
Windows Malware Removal Help & Support
Mac Malware Removal Help & Support
Mobile Malware Removal Help & Support
Blog
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Reply to thread
Menu
Install the app
Install
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
Software
Browsers
Other Browsers
Ungoogled Chromium
Message
<blockquote data-quote="HarborFront" data-source="post: 964157" data-attributes="member: 55987"><p>Eloston himself don't do it. There are contributors to do that. Like I mentioned the binary for Windows is always updated. It's only the UG browser that's not. The previous maintainer left so nobody compiles the binary to browser.</p><p></p><p>If I'm not wrong there are steps to verify and validate that the codes and patches are applied properly and correctly for each new Chromium release. I believe they run some sort of automated tests to do that. Each time when a new binary is produced it has to be verified and validated. I believe Eloston himself takes care of that. You can check at each new binary released and how is the vetting process by Eloston.</p><p></p><p>Compiling a browser takes a lot of time and you need a powerful desktop PC to do that........likely a dedicated one. In addition, you need to be able to troubleshoot and report your findings when something goes wrong halfway. In the early years he may have done it himself but not now. You can see that the UC binaries/browsers for various OS platforms are done by contributors</p><p></p><p>And with Google shortening its release cycle for security patches/new release it has become more difficult for a solo contributor to catch up if he is not dedicated to do so.</p><p></p><p>I may be wrong in some of the above</p><p></p><p>To answer your question why I was still using the unpatched UC. This is not the first time UC was not updated for a few versions. At any rate I suffer no hacking or whatsoever and I prefer its strong de-googling.</p><p></p><p>If you need a more secure browser then UG (Eloston) is not for you.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="HarborFront, post: 964157, member: 55987"] Eloston himself don't do it. There are contributors to do that. Like I mentioned the binary for Windows is always updated. It's only the UG browser that's not. The previous maintainer left so nobody compiles the binary to browser. If I'm not wrong there are steps to verify and validate that the codes and patches are applied properly and correctly for each new Chromium release. I believe they run some sort of automated tests to do that. Each time when a new binary is produced it has to be verified and validated. I believe Eloston himself takes care of that. You can check at each new binary released and how is the vetting process by Eloston. Compiling a browser takes a lot of time and you need a powerful desktop PC to do that........likely a dedicated one. In addition, you need to be able to troubleshoot and report your findings when something goes wrong halfway. In the early years he may have done it himself but not now. You can see that the UC binaries/browsers for various OS platforms are done by contributors And with Google shortening its release cycle for security patches/new release it has become more difficult for a solo contributor to catch up if he is not dedicated to do so. I may be wrong in some of the above To answer your question why I was still using the unpatched UC. This is not the first time UC was not updated for a few versions. At any rate I suffer no hacking or whatsoever and I prefer its strong de-googling. If you need a more secure browser then UG (Eloston) is not for you. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Top