Re: 586 vs 686

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 10:00 PM, Mike Chambers <mike@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-02-20 at 03:06 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>
>>
>> But why aren't you running 64-bit Fedora in the first place?
>
> Not sure, guess didn't want to deal with 64/32 bit mixing for flash and
> whatever else might have needed.  But since then, think flash and
> whatever has been fixed to support 64bit so might give it a shot again.
> Guess have to reset my rsync scripts heh.

Flash wouldn't have been much of an issue in any case—
nspluginwrapper.  It has the nice side effect of also suppressing many
of the flash related crashes that you'd otherwise experience.

(I don't normally run flash, but I installed it (the new 64bit native
version; without using the wrapper) so I could use adobe alchemy to
port a piece of software to the flash VM.  I didn't make it through
the day before it crashed my browser. Fortunately I didn't need it any
longer… the crash reminded me to remove it. :)

-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]
  Powered by Linux