what *is* the proper recipe for 64-bit flash support?

Antonio Olivares olivares14031 at yahoo.com
Thu Apr 2 17:07:44 UTC 2009





--- On Thu, 4/2/09, Robert P. J. Day <rpjday at crashcourse.ca> wrote:

> From: Robert P. J. Day <rpjday at crashcourse.ca>
> Subject: Re: what *is* the proper recipe for 64-bit flash support?
> To: olivares14031 at yahoo.com, "For testers of Fedora Core development releases" <fedora-test-list at redhat.com>
> Date: Thursday, April 2, 2009, 9:09 AM
> ok, here's what i've found so far.  given a couple
> different online
> sources for info:
> 
>  
> http://www.mjmwired.net/resources/mjm-fedora-f10.html#flash
>   https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Flash#For_x86_64
> 
> the *old* recipe for 64-bit flash (not using adobe's
> alpha 64-bit
> plugin) was to first install the adobe release rpm to get
> the adobe
> yum repository info, and then:
> 
>   # yum install \
>       flash-plugin \
>       nspluginwrapper.{i386,x86_64} \
>       alsa-plugins-pulseaudio.i386 \
>       libcurl.i386
> 
> while this might have worked under f10, it won't work
> under f11 since
> the "i386" suffixes appear to have been replaced
> with "i586".  other
> than that, the packages seem to exist, so i guess i can
> just give it a
> shot.  does that look right?
> 
> rday
> --
> 
> ========================================================================
> Robert P. J. Day
> Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry:
>     Have classroom, will lecture.
> 
> http://crashcourse.ca                          Waterloo,
> Ontario, CANADA
> ========================================================================

That was the way it was installed before.  But now there's an x86_64 beta and it would be better(I guess for Adobe) that we test the x86_64 beta flash plugin and report back to them.  The way in the examples makes use of the i386 counterparts and is (not helping) them?

Regards,

Antonio


      




More information about the fedora-test-list mailing list