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@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
