Adobe no longer maintaining yum repo for flash-plugin

05-10-2012, 03:41 PM

On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 11:57 AM, Andre Robatino
<robatino@fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> Sorry for the off-topic post, but I'm not sure what else to do. The Flash plugin
> was updated to 11.2.202.235 about a week ago. This is a security update. But
> their yum repos (both i386 and x86_64) still have 11.2.202.233. I filed
> https://bugbase.adobe.com/index.cfm?event=bug&id=3185733 and they promptly
> closed it as NotABug. There is an updated RPM at
> http://get.adobe.com/flashplayer/ under ".rpm for other Linux" but I'm not sure
> if it's identical to what the repo is supposed to provide. In any case,
> providing a yum repo implies a promise that it will be kept updated. Could
> people please vote for my bug in the hope of getting someone at Adobe to wake
> up? Thanks.

Adobe drops Flash for Linux except in Google Chrome
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Adobe-Drops-Flash-for-Linux-Except-in-Google-Chrome-254483.shtml

Maybe this has something to do?

FC
--
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
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

05-10-2012, 03:58 PM

On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 12:41 -0300, Fernando Cassia wrote:
> On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 11:57 AM, Andre Robatino
> <robatino@fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> > Sorry for the off-topic post, but I'm not sure what else to do. The Flash plugin
> > was updated to 11.2.202.235 about a week ago. This is a security update. But
> > their yum repos (both i386 and x86_64) still have 11.2.202.233. I filed
> > https://bugbase.adobe.com/index.cfm?event=bug&id=3185733 and they promptly
> > closed it as NotABug. There is an updated RPM at
> > http://get.adobe.com/flashplayer/ under ".rpm for other Linux" but I'm not sure
> > if it's identical to what the repo is supposed to provide. In any case,
> > providing a yum repo implies a promise that it will be kept updated. Could
> > people please vote for my bug in the hope of getting someone at Adobe to wake
> > up? Thanks.
>
> Adobe drops Flash for Linux except in Google Chrome
> http://news.softpedia.com/news/Adobe-Drops-Flash-for-Linux-Except-in-Google-Chrome-254483.shtml
>
> Maybe this has something to do?
>
> FC

You still need the update for flash in chrome to work.

--
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
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

05-10-2012, 04:11 PM

On 05/10/2012 11:58 PM, Terry Polzin wrote:
> You still need the update for flash in chrome to work.

It is built in to chrome and currently at FlashPlayer_11_2_202_235_FlashPlayer in
Chrome 18.0.1025.168

--
Never be afraid to laugh at yourself, after all, you could be missing out on the joke
of the century. -- Dame Edna Everage
--
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
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

05-10-2012, 04:13 PM

On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 12:58 PM, Terry Polzin <foxec208@wowway.com> wrote:
> You still need the update for flash in chrome to work.

Mi guess is that Chrome features Flash as an internal component and it
uses Chrome's internal auto-update mechanism?

FC
--
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
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

05-10-2012, 06:34 PM

On 05/10/2012 09:13 AM, Fernando Cassia wrote:

On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 12:58 PM, Terry Polzin<foxec208@wowway.com> wrote:

You still need the update for flash in chrome to work.

Mi guess is that Chrome features Flash as an internal component and it
uses Chrome's internal auto-update mechanism?

FC

So you're saying Chromium users are SOL?

--
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
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

05-10-2012, 07:58 PM

On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 12:41 -0300, Fernando Cassia wrote:
> On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 11:57 AM, Andre Robatino
> <robatino@fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> > Sorry for the off-topic post, but I'm not sure what else to do. The Flash plugin
> > was updated to 11.2.202.235 about a week ago. This is a security update. But
> > their yum repos (both i386 and x86_64) still have 11.2.202.233. I filed
> > https://bugbase.adobe.com/index.cfm?event=bug&id=3185733 and they promptly
> > closed it as NotABug. There is an updated RPM at
> > http://get.adobe.com/flashplayer/ under ".rpm for other Linux" but I'm not sure
> > if it's identical to what the repo is supposed to provide. In any case,
> > providing a yum repo implies a promise that it will be kept updated. Could
> > people please vote for my bug in the hope of getting someone at Adobe to wake
> > up? Thanks.
>
> Adobe drops Flash for Linux except in Google Chrome
> http://news.softpedia.com/news/Adobe-Drops-Flash-for-Linux-Except-in-Google-Chrome-254483.shtml
>
> Maybe this has something to do?
>
> FC

This is strange because of the adobe website they advertise a linux
flash-plugin later than the one I can install from the F16 adobe.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
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

05-10-2012, 09:22 PM

On 05/10/2012 08:57 AM, Andre Robatino wrote:

Sorry for the off-topic post, but I'm not sure what else to do. The Flash plugin
was updated to 11.2.202.235 about a week ago. This is a security update. But
their yum repos (both i386 and x86_64) still have 11.2.202.233. I filed
https://bugbase.adobe.com/index.cfm?event=bug&id=3185733 and they promptly
closed it as NotABug. There is an updated RPM at
http://get.adobe.com/flashplayer/ under ".rpm for other Linux" but I'm not sure
if it's identical to what the repo is supposed to provide. In any case,
providing a yum repo implies a promise that it will be kept updated. Could
people please vote for my bug in the hope of getting someone at Adobe to wake
up? Thanks.

See http://trisquel.info/en/wiki/play-videos-without-using-flash
and
http://www.youtube.com/html5

--
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
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

05-11-2012, 12:11 AM

On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 9:11 AM, Ed Greshko <Ed.Greshko@greshko.com> wrote:
> On 05/10/2012 11:58 PM, Terry Polzin wrote:
>> You still need the update for flash in chrome to work.
>
> It is built in to chrome and currently at FlashPlayer_11_2_202_235_FlashPlayer in
> Chrome 18.0.1025.168

Only on i686. x86_64 users still need to grab the plugin from Adobe.

-T.C.
--
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
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

05-11-2012, 12:38 AM

On 05/11/2012 08:11 AM, T.C. Hollingsworth wrote:
> On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 9:11 AM, Ed Greshko <Ed.Greshko@greshko.com> wrote:
>> On 05/10/2012 11:58 PM, Terry Polzin wrote:
>>> You still need the update for flash in chrome to work.
>> It is built in to chrome and currently at FlashPlayer_11_2_202_235_FlashPlayer in
>> Chrome 18.0.1025.168
> Only on i686. x86_64 users still need to grab the plugin from Adobe.
>

Thanks for reminding me of that. I'm so used to using i686 for browser stuff due to
past problems that I often forget that x86_64 exists....and getting better(?).

--
Never be afraid to laugh at yourself, after all, you could be missing out on the joke
of the century. -- Dame Edna Everage
--
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
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

05-11-2012, 05:06 AM

On 05/10/2012 07:11 PM, T.C. Hollingsworth wrote:
> Only on i686. x86_64 users still need to grab the plugin from Adobe.

It's actually back in the "unstable" 64-bit version,
google-chrome-unstable-20.0.1130.1-135886.x86_64.

--
================================================== ======================
Ian Pilcher arequipeno@gmail.com
"If you're going to shift my paradigm ... at least buy me dinner first."
================================================== ======================

--
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
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org