Linux Archive

Linux Archive (http://www.linux-archive.org/)
-   CentOS (http://www.linux-archive.org/centos/)
-   -   firefox. java. 64 bit. bleah! (http://www.linux-archive.org/centos/453513-firefox-java-64-bit-bleah.html)

11-16-2010 08:28 PM

firefox. java. 64 bit. bleah!
 
Found this <http://plugindoc.mozdev.org/linux-amd64.html#java-sun>, and I
remember the plugins directory... except firefox 3.6.11, I can't find any,
not in ~/.mozilla, not in /usr/lib64/mozilla. Anyone have a clue for the
poor?

mark

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Nicolas Thierry-Mieg 11-17-2010 06:43 AM

firefox. java. 64 bit. bleah!
 
m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
> Found this<http://plugindoc.mozdev.org/linux-amd64.html#java-sun>, and I
> remember the plugins directory... except firefox 3.6.11, I can't find any,
> not in ~/.mozilla, not in /usr/lib64/mozilla. Anyone have a clue for the
> poor?

that's strange:
[nthierry@localhost ~]$ rpm -q firefox xulrunner
firefox-3.6.11-2.el5.centos.x86_64
xulrunner-1.9.2.11-4.el5.x86_64
[nthierry@localhost ~]$ rpm -q firefox -R | grep xulrunner
xulrunner >= 1.9.2.11-1
[nthierry@localhost ~]$ rpm -ql xulrunner | grep lib64/mozilla/plugins
/usr/lib64/mozilla/plugins

something's wrong with your system.
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Lars Hecking 11-20-2010 10:25 PM

firefox. java. 64 bit. bleah!
 
Nicolas Thierry-Mieg writes:
> m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
> > Found this<http://plugindoc.mozdev.org/linux-amd64.html#java-sun>, and I
> > remember the plugins directory... except firefox 3.6.11, I can't find any,
> > not in ~/.mozilla, not in /usr/lib64/mozilla. Anyone have a clue for the
> > poor?
>
> that's strange:
> [nthierry@localhost ~]$ rpm -q firefox xulrunner
> firefox-3.6.11-2.el5.centos.x86_64
> xulrunner-1.9.2.11-4.el5.x86_64
> [nthierry@localhost ~]$ rpm -q firefox -R | grep xulrunner
> xulrunner >= 1.9.2.11-1
> [nthierry@localhost ~]$ rpm -ql xulrunner | grep lib64/mozilla/plugins
> /usr/lib64/mozilla/plugins
> y
> something's wrong with your system.

Possibly. Or possibly not. On a closely related topic, can you comment on
whether or not it's a good idea to install the nspluginwrapper rpms on x86_64?
They seem to be fundamentally broken.



---------------------------------------------------------------
This message and any attachments may contain Cypress (or its
subsidiaries) confidential information. If it has been received
in error, please advise the sender and immediately delete this
message.
---------------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Nicolas Thierry-Mieg 11-21-2010 07:39 PM

firefox. java. 64 bit. bleah!
 
Lars Hecking wrote:
> Nicolas Thierry-Mieg writes:
>> m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
>>> Found this<http://plugindoc.mozdev.org/linux-amd64.html#java-sun>, and I
>>> remember the plugins directory... except firefox 3.6.11, I can't find any,
>>> not in ~/.mozilla, not in /usr/lib64/mozilla. Anyone have a clue for the
>>> poor?
>>
>> that's strange:
>> [nthierry@localhost ~]$ rpm -q firefox xulrunner
>> firefox-3.6.11-2.el5.centos.x86_64
>> xulrunner-1.9.2.11-4.el5.x86_64
>> [nthierry@localhost ~]$ rpm -q firefox -R | grep xulrunner
>> xulrunner>= 1.9.2.11-1
>> [nthierry@localhost ~]$ rpm -ql xulrunner | grep lib64/mozilla/plugins
>> /usr/lib64/mozilla/plugins
>> y
>> something's wrong with your system.
>
> Possibly. Or possibly not.

not sure what you mean by that?

> On a closely related topic, can you comment on
> whether or not it's a good idea to install the nspluginwrapper rpms on x86_64?
> They seem to be fundamentally broken.

nspluginwrapper is for running 32-bit plugins in a 64-bit browser. Now
that we have functional 64-bit flash and java plugins I don't see the
need, but YMMV.
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

JohnS 11-21-2010 08:00 PM

firefox. java. 64 bit. bleah!
 
On Sun, 2010-11-21 at 21:39 +0100, Nicolas Thierry-Mieg wrote:
> Lars Hecking wrote:
> > Nicolas Thierry-Mieg writes:
> >> m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
> >>> Found this<http://plugindoc.mozdev.org/linux-amd64.html#java-sun>, and I
> >>> remember the plugins directory... except firefox 3.6.11, I can't find any,
> >>> not in ~/.mozilla, not in /usr/lib64/mozilla. Anyone have a clue for the
> >>> poor?
> >>
> >> that's strange:
> >> [nthierry@localhost ~]$ rpm -q firefox xulrunner
> >> firefox-3.6.11-2.el5.centos.x86_64
> >> xulrunner-1.9.2.11-4.el5.x86_64
> >> [nthierry@localhost ~]$ rpm -q firefox -R | grep xulrunner
> >> xulrunner>= 1.9.2.11-1
> >> [nthierry@localhost ~]$ rpm -ql xulrunner | grep lib64/mozilla/plugins
> >> /usr/lib64/mozilla/plugins
> >> y
> >> something's wrong with your system.
> >
> > Possibly. Or possibly not.
>
> not sure what you mean by that?
>
> > On a closely related topic, can you comment on
> > whether or not it's a good idea to install the nspluginwrapper rpms on x86_64?
> > They seem to be fundamentally broken.
>
> nspluginwrapper is for running 32-bit plugins in a 64-bit browser. Now
> that we have functional 64-bit flash and java plugins I don't see the
> need, but YMMV.
----
Ok lets halt here. I see on a Multilib Install two wrappers....
nswrapper_64_64.libflashplayer.so
nswrapper_32_64.libflashplayer.so

with

rpm -q firefox

firefox-3.6.11-2.el5.centos.i386
firefox-3.6.11-2.el5.centos.x86_64 <---default

Kind of stupid but it is a devel machine with the complete distro on it.
Which can complicate life further. If you strip it down to one version
and no multilib life is easier. The 64 bit flash is really no better in
my opinion because when I installed a newer Creative SB Card sound quit
under the 64 flash.

John



_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Lars Hecking 11-22-2010 01:29 PM

firefox. java. 64 bit. bleah!
 
Nicolas Thierry-Mieg writes:
>
> nspluginwrapper is for running 32-bit plugins in a 64-bit browser. Now
> that we have functional 64-bit flash and java plugins I don't see the
> need, but YMMV.

We do not have a functional 64-bit flash plugin, and no 64-bit adobe plugin,
so we need the wrapper for those.

I've done some systematic testing this morning. If you don't want to read
everything below, the summary is that on an x86_64 system, only the 64-bit
java plugin works, and the 32-bit plugin crashes. This means that the only
working setup on x86_64 is firefox + java plugin x86_64, nspluginwrapper
plus Adobe + flash 32-bit plugins. The brave may try the beta 64-bit flash
plugin.

Test setup. This is a 64-bit machine running CentOS 5.4, all relevant packages
removed and a fresh, clean install of firefox 3.0.18 i386, Adobe reader 9.4,
flash-plugin from rpmforge. I also extracted the java plugin from
jre-6u22-linux-i586-rpm.bin and copied it into /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins.

$ ll /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins/
total 292
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 39 Nov 22 13:09 libflashplayer.so -> /usr/lib/flash-plugin/libflashplayer.so
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 77510 Sep 15 09:44 libnpjp2.so
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 30640 Oct 9 2009 mozplugger.so
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 179552 Nov 22 13:09 nppdf.so
$

firefox starts normally and about:plugins shows the adobe/flash/java plugins
are installed. Then I browse to www.javatester.org and click on the "Java
Enabled?" button. The result is a crash:

$ firefox
Didn't find JVM under /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins
firefox: ../../../../src/plugin/solaris/plugin2/common/JavaVM.c:104: InitializeJVM: Assertion `foundJVM' failed.
/usr/lib/firefox-3.0.18/run-mozilla.sh: line 131: 6093 Aborted "$prog" ${1+"$@"}
$

I get the same result with a binary, /usr/local based installation of firefox
3.6.12 (i386) from mozilla.org.

Next, I am trying the following: install the complete 32-bit java rpm under
/usr/java.i386 and link the 32-bin java plugin rather than copy it.

$ cd /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins/
$ ll
total 212
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 39 Nov 22 13:09 libflashplayer.so -> /usr/lib/flash-plugin/libflashplayer.so
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 43 Nov 22 13:36 libnpjp2.so -> /usr/java.i386/default/lib/i386/libnpjp2.so
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 30640 Oct 9 2009 mozplugger.so
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 179552 Nov 22 13:09 nppdf.so
$

Similar result.

$ firefox
Error occurred during initialization of VM
java/lang/NoClassDefFoundError: java/lang/Object
$

The above proves conclusively that the 32-bit firefox browser is broken on
a 64-bit system. The culprit is probably java.

Onward to x86_64. Remove all packages, start with a fresh install of
Adobe reader, flash plugin (i386), jre-6u22-linux-x64-rpm.bin, firefox 3.0.18
x86_64, *no* nspluginwrapper. about:plugins shows the java plugin only, as
expected, and the browser passes the "java enabled" test at javatester.org.

Then I install the i386 nspluginwrapper. No change in about:plugins, but I
noticed this

$ ll plugins*/libn*
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 38 Nov 22 13:51 plugins-wrapped/libnpjp2.so -> /usr/lib64/mozilla/plugins/libnpjp2.so
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 39 Nov 22 13:46 plugins/libnpjp2.so -> /usr/java/default/lib/amd64/libnpjp2.so
$

i.e. nspluginwrapper.i386 installation has wrapped the native 64-bit java
plugin.

Last step is the installation of nspluginwrapper.x86_64 on top of all.
All plugins show up and java works.

Summary: only the 64-bit browser works on a 64-bit machine. It needs
nspluginwrapper to make use of the 32-bit blob plugins. The 32-bit browser
crashes and burns as soon as java (or even java script) is involved.
In this round of testing, I haven't seen the removal of the java plugin
link from the plugins-wrapped directory that I reported earlier.



---------------------------------------------------------------
This message and any attachments may contain Cypress (or its
subsidiaries) confidential information. If it has been received
in error, please advise the sender and immediately delete this
message.
---------------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Nicolas Thierry-Mieg 11-22-2010 05:24 PM

firefox. java. 64 bit. bleah!
 
Lars Hecking wrote:
> Nicolas Thierry-Mieg writes:
>>
>> nspluginwrapper is for running 32-bit plugins in a 64-bit browser. Now
>> that we have functional 64-bit flash and java plugins I don't see the
>> need, but YMMV.
>
> We do not have a functional 64-bit flash plugin, and no 64-bit adobe plugin,
> so we need the wrapper for those.
>
> I've done some systematic testing this morning. If you don't want to read
> everything below, the summary is that on an x86_64 system, only the 64-bit
> java plugin works, and the 32-bit plugin crashes. This means that the only
> working setup on x86_64 is firefox + java plugin x86_64, nspluginwrapper
> plus Adobe + flash 32-bit plugins. The brave may try the beta 64-bit flash
> plugin.

the beta x86_64 flash plugin is what I was referring to. I've been using
it for a while (from rpmforge) and it works well for me.

my setup, which works fine on several systems with different hardware,
is pure x86_64. No nspluginwrapper, I dropped that when the 64-bit flash
plugin was satisfactory for me. On the system I'm writing from I have:
flash-plugin-10.2.161.23-0.1.el5.rf.x86_64
jre-1.6.0_18-fcs.x86_64

I don't use the acrobat plugin, I usually open pdfs with evince. I also
only activate java on a few specific sites (yes I know I should update it).

[nthierry@localhost ~]$ l /usr/lib64/mozilla/plugins/
total 0
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 41 Nov 17 08:48 libflashplayer.so ->
/usr/lib64/flash-plugin/libflashplayer.so
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 39 Jul 6 22:14 libnpjp2.so ->
/usr/java/default/lib/amd64/libnpjp2.so

I use seamonkey (x86_64) rather than firefox, but I just tested both
java (at www.javatester.org) and flash (youtube) in firefox x86_64 and
they both work.

But as I said, YMMV...
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:50 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.