starred/ArchiveBox

Fork 0

mirror of https://github.com/ArchiveBox/ArchiveBox.git synced 2026-04-25 17:16:00 +03:00

[GH-ISSUE #414] Feature Request: If you can't find chrom(e/ium), stop trying to use it #275

New issue

Closed

opened 2026-03-01 14:42:02 +03:00 by kerem · 4 comments

kerem commented

2026-03-01 14:42:02 +03:00

Owner

Originally created by @Jwink3101 on GitHub (Jul 31, 2020).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/ArchiveBox/ArchiveBox/issues/414

Type

General question or discussion
Propose a brand new feature
Request modification of existing behavior or design

What is the problem that your feature request solves

At every invocation, including help, archivebox tells me it can't find chrom(e/ium). This is expected as I do not have it installed (currently using Webfaction. May migrate soon).

But when I go to add a page, it throws errors (in stdout, not on the site) and doesn't archive. To fix this, I set

export FETCH_SCREENSHOT=False
export FETCH_DOM=False
export FETCH_PDF=False

in my invocation script

Describe the ideal specific solution you'd want, and whether it fits into any broader scope of changes

Since you already know chromium isn't installed, set those automagically

What hacks or alternative solutions have you tried to solve the problem?

See above

How badly do you want this new feature?

It's an urgent deal-breaker, I can't live without it
It's important to add it in the near-mid term future
It would be nice to have eventually

I'm willing to contribute dev time / money to fix this issue
I like ArchiveBox so far / would recommend it to a friend
I've had a lot of difficulty getting ArchiveBox set up
- See #413 and another I'll be adding in a minute

Originally created by @Jwink3101 on GitHub (Jul 31, 2020). Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/ArchiveBox/ArchiveBox/issues/414  ## Type - [ ] General question or discussion - [ ] Propose a brand new feature - [X] Request modification of existing behavior or design ## What is the problem that your feature request solves At every invocation, including `help`, archivebox tells me it can't find chrom(e/ium). This is expected as I do not have it installed (currently using Webfaction. May migrate soon). But when I go to add a page, it throws errors (in stdout, not on the site) and doesn't archive. To fix this, I set ```bash export FETCH_SCREENSHOT=False export FETCH_DOM=False export FETCH_PDF=False ``` in my invocation script ## Describe the ideal specific solution you'd want, and whether it fits into any broader scope of changes Since you already know chromium isn't installed, set those automagically ## What hacks or alternative solutions have you tried to solve the problem? See above ## How badly do you want this new feature? - [ ] It's an urgent deal-breaker, I can't live without it - [ ] It's important to add it in the near-mid term future - [X] It would be nice to have eventually --- - [X] I'm willing to contribute dev time / money to fix this issue - [X] I like ArchiveBox so far / would recommend it to a friend - [X] I've had a lot of difficulty getting ArchiveBox set up - See #413 and another I'll be adding in a minute

kerem closed this issue

2026-03-01 14:42:02 +03:00

kerem commented

2026-03-01 14:42:03 +03:00

Author

Owner

@pirate commented on GitHub (Aug 1, 2020):

archivebox config --set USE_CHROME=False

@pirate commented on GitHub (Aug 1, 2020): ```bash archivebox config --set USE_CHROME=False ``` <img width="697" alt="Screen Shot 2020-08-01 at 11 29 29 AM" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/511499/89104845-5203a500-d3ea-11ea-85f5-7c1529ba1ab2.png">

kerem commented

2026-03-01 14:42:03 +03:00

Author

Owner

@Jwink3101 commented on GitHub (Aug 6, 2020):

It is obviously your prerogative on how to handle this but even USE_CHROME=False doesn't change the fact that you know you don't have chrome. So it reduces three settings to one but it is still superfluous and causes unexpected errors.

(I strongly argue that if the code knows it doesn't have chrome, it shouldn't try and error out)

@Jwink3101 commented on GitHub (Aug 6, 2020): It is obviously your prerogative on how to handle this but even `USE_CHROME=False` doesn't change the fact that you **know** you don't have chrome. So it reduces three settings to one but it is still superfluous and causes unexpected errors. (I *strongly* argue that if the code knows it doesn't have chrome, it shouldn't try and error out)

kerem commented

2026-03-01 14:42:03 +03:00

Author

Owner

@cdvv7788 commented on GitHub (Aug 6, 2020):

I think erroring out is a sane default. It is explicit behaviour with a known cause. If you want to avoid using chrome, just tell archivebox to avoid trying to use it.
Implicit (automagical) behaviors can obscure issues, and other users will be left wondering why some of their archiving methods are not working as expected. Also, the USE_CHROME flag is explicitly telling archivebox to use chrome...changing this to be more automatic would require a deeper change to deprecate that flag.

@cdvv7788 commented on GitHub (Aug 6, 2020): I think erroring out is a sane default. It is explicit behaviour with a known cause. If you want to avoid using chrome, just tell archivebox to avoid trying to use it. Implicit (automagical) behaviors can obscure issues, and other users will be left wondering why some of their archiving methods are not working as expected. Also, the `USE_CHROME` flag is explicitly telling archivebox to use chrome...changing this to be more `automatic` would require a deeper change to deprecate that flag.

kerem commented

2026-03-01 14:42:03 +03:00

Author

Owner

@pirate commented on GitHub (Aug 6, 2020):

I agree with @cdvv7788 Chrome is such a core part of the ArchiveBox feature set that I'd rather make it extremely noisy unless the user explicitly disables it. Implicit disabling of all the chrome methods would leave many users confused as to why it's silently failing on a large number of the archive methods.

@pirate commented on GitHub (Aug 6, 2020): I agree with @cdvv7788 Chrome is such a core part of the ArchiveBox feature set that I'd rather make it extremely noisy unless the user explicitly disables it. Implicit disabling of all the chrome methods would leave many users confused as to why it's silently failing on a large number of the archive methods.

kerem referenced this issue

2026-03-01 14:48:27 +03:00

[PR #275] [CLOSED] Draft: Hypothetical modularizing refactor spec #1105

kerem referenced this issue

2026-03-01 18:00:09 +03:00

[PR #275] [CLOSED] Draft: Hypothetical modularizing refactor spec #2616

kerem referenced this issue

2026-03-15 01:27:27 +03:00

[PR #275] [CLOSED] Draft: Hypothetical modularizing refactor spec #4118