> It depends on ffmpeg which has patent encumbered codecs. Flash files
> tend to use MP3 for audio and unless the player can use gstreamer
> instead of ffmpeg (which is the case for Gnash), it can't be in
> Fedora.
Right.
As far as I can see, the packages in RPM Fusion are outdated and still
in
On Thursday 06 October 2011 17:17:01 Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> On 10/06/2011 09:20 PM, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
> > 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 ope
> On Thu, 2011-10-06 at 17:06 +0200, 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.
>
> Flash is not "in" Fedora. The fact that Adobe provides a repo means nothing.
> The official Fedor
On 10/06/2011 09:20 PM, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
> 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/
On Thu, 2011-10-06 at 17:06 +0200, 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.
Flash is not "in" Fedora. The fact that Adobe provides a repo means
nothing. The official Fedora repos cont
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 av
> 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
Once upon a time, Don Quixote de la Mancha 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 an
Hi Marko,
On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 1:49 PM, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
> On Thursday 06 October 2011 12:30:42 suvayu ali wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 1:26 PM, Tom Horsley wrote:
>> > The security geeks will tell you it is needed to isolate
>> > the plugin into a separate executable,
>>
>> As far a
On Thursday 06 October 2011 12:30:42 suvayu ali wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 1:26 PM, Tom Horsley 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
On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 1:26 PM, Tom Horsley 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 b
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 bre
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
On Wed, Oct 05, 2011 at 02:19:05PM +, 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 i
Chris Adams writes:
> Once upon a time, Wolfgang S. Rupprecht 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
Once upon a time, Wolfgang S. Rupprecht 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
Andre Robatino writes:
> 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
&g
Andre Robatino fedoraproject.org> writes:
> In particular, I don't know if there's any reason for anyone to
> use the 32-bit wrapped plugin anymore.
I suppose it should be kept there as a backup, so people can switch to it in
case a bug appears that only affects the 64-bit plugin.
--
users mai
On Wed, 5 Oct 2011 10:52:03 -0400
Tom Horsley wrote:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=638477
>
> (Hopefully it is fixed in the one in the new repo).
Hey! It seems to be working. I just installed from the repo
and tried the link in that bug, and the sound no longer has
the horrible g
Tom Horsley gmail.com> writes:
> But I wonder: Do you still need to fix the calls to memcpy to call memmove
instead?
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=638477
>
> (Hopefully it is fixed in the one in the new repo).
I'm pretty sure they fixed that already in an earlier version, but
On Wed, 5 Oct 2011 14:19:05 + (UTC)
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 i
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://fedoraprojec
On 06/19/2011 12:20 AM, Colin Paul Adams wrote:
> The following page is not displaying the flash:
>
> http://live.shogi.or.jp/joryu_ouza/kifu/ricoh20110618.html
>
> Does this work for anyone else? If so, what flash plugin software are
> you using?
Works for me with the latest version of Adobe Flas
On 19.06.2011, Colin Paul Adams wrote:
> http://live.shogi.or.jp/joryu_ouza/kifu/ricoh20110618.html
>
> Does this work for anyone else? If so, what flash plugin software are
> you using?
Works perfectly for me. Version 10.2-d161 (64 bit).
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
> "Erik" == Erik P Olsen writes:
Erik> On 19/06/11 09:20, Colin Paul Adams wrote:
>> I have the following situation:
>>
>> Shockwave Flash
>>
>> File: nswrapper_32_64.libflashplayer.so Version: Shockwave Flash
>> 10.3 r181
>>
>> MIME Type Description Suf
On 19/06/11 09:20, Colin Paul Adams wrote:
> I have the following situation:
>
> Shockwave Flash
>
> File: nswrapper_32_64.libflashplayer.so
> Version:
> Shockwave Flash 10.3 r181
>
> MIME Type Description SuffixesEnabled
> application/x-shockwave-flash Shockw
On 19/06/11 08:20, Colin Paul Adams wrote:
>
> The following page is not displaying the flash:
>
> http://live.shogi.or.jp/joryu_ouza/kifu/ricoh20110618.html
>
> Does this work for anyone else? If so, what flash plugin software are
> you using?
Fine with the native 64bit, not upto date security
I have the following situation:
Shockwave Flash
File: nswrapper_32_64.libflashplayer.so
Version:
Shockwave Flash 10.3 r181
MIME Type Description SuffixesEnabled
application/x-shockwave-flash Shockwave Flash swf Yes
application/futuresplashFutu
--- On Sat, 3/13/10, Fred Williams wrote:
> I've been trying to put up with using
> Gnash in place of the normal adobe-flash plugin, but
> there's a lot of flash applets I've found that just
> don't seem to work with it, across many sites, and
> I'm back looking for FireFox-compatible alternative
I've been trying to put up with using Gnash in place of the normal
adobe-flash plugin, but there's a lot of flash applets I've found that just
don't seem to work with it, across many sites, and I'm back looking for
FireFox-compatible alternatives to both Gnash and adobe's flash.
I'd rather avoid ha
30 matches
Mail list logo
