FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora User

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 10-06-2011, 12:40 AM
"Wolfgang S. Rupprecht"
 
Default heads up: Adobe now has full 64-bit Flash support

Chris Adams <cmadams@hiwaay.net> writes:
> Once upon a time, Wolfgang S. Rupprecht <wolfgang.rupprecht@gmail.com> said:
>> Too bad they botched the yum repo file and wired it for 64-bit only.
>> Folks with a mixture of 32-bit and 64-bit systems now have to be careful
>> to not rsync that file across all their machines. Much better would be
>> to use "$basearch" instead of the "x86_64" or "i386". Folks might want
>> to use this as their adobe flash repo file:
>
> You might want both 32 and 64 bit repos right now; if you need Acrobat
> Reader, that's still 32 bit only (and not in their 64 bit repo).

The only thing in that repo is flash-plugin.

I believe you can also use yumex and override the default $basearch.

-wolfgang
--
g+: https://plus.google.com/114566345864337108516/posts
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
 
Old 10-06-2011, 10:16 AM
Alexander Volovics
 
Default heads up: Adobe now has full 64-bit Flash support

On Wed, Oct 05, 2011 at 02:19:05PM +0000, Andre Robatino wrote:

> Adobe now has full 64-bit Flash support, including a 64-bit repo. Just go to
> http://get.adobe.com/flashplayer/ , select "YUM for Linux (YUM)", download and
> install adobe-release-x86_64-1.0-1.noarch.rpm, and install flash-plugin from the
> repo. Someone needs to edit https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Flash (meaning taking
> an axe to it). In particular, I don't know if there's any reason for anyone to
> use the 32-bit wrapped plugin anymore.

Anybody know if it is still necessary to use 64 bit nspluginwrapper
with the 64 bit flash-plugin. Does this have any advantages at all?

(I am for the moment not considering that you might need the wrapper
for other plugins like Adobe Reader).

When I installed the 64 bit flash-plugin it immediately got wrapped
(nswrapper.libflashplayer.so) so I uninstalled nspluginwrapper.x86_64
and libflashplayer.so seems to work just as well as
nswrapper.libflashplayer.so though I have not tested it extensively.

I nspluginwrapper.x86_64 needed for anything at all?

Alexander


--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
 
Old 10-06-2011, 11:16 AM
Don Quixote de la Mancha
 
Default heads up: Adobe now has full 64-bit Flash support

Is Adobe Reader's ability to fill out tax forms something only it can
do because the file format and API are undocumented, or just because
the Open Source PDF readers have not yet implemented the feature?

If such tax forms depend on undocumented trade secrets, it's time to
complain to your elected representatives. It's not right that the
citizenry should have to depend on proprietary software to file their
tax returns.

Don Quixote
quixote@dulcineatech.com

On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 4:45 PM, Chris Adams <cmadams@hiwaay.net> wrote:
> Once upon a time, Wolfgang S. Rupprecht <wolfgang.rupprecht@gmail.com> said:
>> Too bad they botched the yum repo file and wired it for 64-bit only.
>> Folks with a mixture of 32-bit and 64-bit systems now have to be careful
>> to not rsync that file across all their machines. *Much better would be
>> to use "$basearch" instead of the "x86_64" or "i386". *Folks might want
>> to use this as their adobe flash repo file:
>
> You might want both 32 and 64 bit repos right now; if you need Acrobat
> Reader, that's still 32 bit only (and not in their 64 bit repo).
>
> And yes, before somebody says "use <foo> instead", there are still
> things that acroread does (that are required) that AFAIK the Open Source
> PDF readers don't do (such as fill out tax forms with scripted
> calculations).
> --
> Chris Adams <cmadams@hiwaay.net>
> Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY Internet Services
> I don't speak for anybody but myself - that's enough trouble.
> --
> users mailing list
> users@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
> Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
>



--
Don Quixote de la Mancha
Dulcinea Technologies Corporation
Software of Elegance and Beauty
http://www.dulcineatech.com
quixote@dulcineatech.com
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
 
Old 10-06-2011, 11:26 AM
Tom Horsley
 
Default heads up: Adobe now has full 64-bit Flash support

On Thu, 6 Oct 2011 12:16:21 +0200
Alexander Volovics wrote:

> Is nspluginwrapper.x86_64 needed for anything at all?

The security geeks will tell you it is needed to isolate
the plugin into a separate executable, but as near as
I can tell, the only thing the wrapper is good for is
making flash break sometimes (under obscure conditions).
See:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=712545
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
 
Old 10-06-2011, 11:30 AM
suvayu ali
 
Default heads up: Adobe now has full 64-bit Flash support

On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 1:26 PM, Tom Horsley <horsley1953@gmail.com> wrote:
> The security geeks will tell you it is needed to isolate
> the plugin into a separate executable,

As far as I know, the latest Firefox and Google Chrome versions
already sandbox plugins. Gone are the days when a crashed plugin meant
a crashed browser.

--
Suvayu

Open source is the future. It sets us free.
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
 
Old 10-06-2011, 11:49 AM
Marko Vojinovic
 
Default heads up: Adobe now has full 64-bit Flash support

On Thursday 06 October 2011 12:30:42 suvayu ali wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 1:26 PM, Tom Horsley <horsley1953@gmail.com> wrote:
> > The security geeks will tell you it is needed to isolate
> > the plugin into a separate executable,
>
> As far as I know, the latest Firefox and Google Chrome versions
> already sandbox plugins. Gone are the days when a crashed plugin meant
> a crashed browser.

Can you define "latest"? On my up-to-date F14, the "latest" Firefox is version
3.6.23. Does this version do that sandboxing of plugins?

Best, :-)
Marko

--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
 
Old 10-06-2011, 12:34 PM
suvayu ali
 
Default heads up: Adobe now has full 64-bit Flash support

Hi Marko,

On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 1:49 PM, Marko Vojinovic <vvmarko@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thursday 06 October 2011 12:30:42 suvayu ali wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 1:26 PM, Tom Horsley <horsley1953@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > The security geeks will tell you it is needed to isolate
>> > the plugin into a separate executable,
>>
>> As far as I know, the latest Firefox and Google Chrome versions
>> already sandbox plugins. Gone are the days when a crashed plugin meant
>> a crashed browser.
>
> Can you define "latest"? On my up-to-date F14, the "latest" Firefox is version
> 3.6.23. Does this version do that sandboxing of plugins?
>

I believe FF 4 introduced this feature and Chrome had this built in
from the very start. You can get packaged FF 7.0.1 from remi's repo. I
have been using them for a year, IMO his packages are very reliable.

> Best, :-)
> Marko
>

GL

--
Suvayu

Open source is the future. It sets us free.
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
 
Old 10-06-2011, 12:43 PM
Chris Adams
 
Default heads up: Adobe now has full 64-bit Flash support

Once upon a time, Don Quixote de la Mancha <quixote@dulcineatech.com> said:
> Is Adobe Reader's ability to fill out tax forms something only it can
> do because the file format and API are undocumented, or just because
> the Open Source PDF readers have not yet implemented the feature?

The PDF format is fully documented and open (and IIRC even includes a
waiver of any applicable Adobe patents); the problem is that the full
spec includes a JavaScript interpreter (which is the source of many
Adobe Reader security bugs), and the Open Source PDF readers don't
implement that.

--
Chris Adams <cmadams@hiwaay.net>
Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY Internet Services
I don't speak for anybody but myself - that's enough trouble.
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
 
Old 10-06-2011, 03:06 PM
Raphael Groner
 
Default heads up: Adobe now has full 64-bit Flash support

> Adobe now has full 64-bit Flash support, including a 64-bit repo.

Lightspark is available since ages and it's open source.
The new upstream version can also handle youtube again.

It handles AVM2 and falls back to Gnash otherwise.

So, I don't see any needs for Adobe closed source binaries any more in
a distribution that claims to be completely open and free.

http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/lightspark/wiki/Building#TheeasywayonFedora

Don't ask me why available only in RPM Fusion and not the official
Fedora repo.
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
 
Old 10-06-2011, 03:50 PM
Marko Vojinovic
 
Default heads up: Adobe now has full 64-bit Flash support

On Thursday 06 October 2011 16:06:13 Raphael Groner wrote:
> So, I don't see any needs for Adobe closed source binaries any more in
> a distribution that claims to be completely open and free.
>
> http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/lightspark/wiki/Building#TheeasywayonFedora
>
> Don't ask me why available only in RPM Fusion and not the official
> Fedora repo.

So, why is it available only in RPMFusion and not the official repo? :-) Is it
not completely open and free, maybe?

Best, :-)
Marko

--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 07:42 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org