On Sat, 2008-05-24 at 01:54 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote: > On Sat, 24.05.08 00:34, Bastien Nocera (bnocera@xxxxxxxxxx) wrote: > > > > > On Fri, 2008-05-23 at 16:51 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote: > > > Rahul Sundaram (sundaram@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) said: > > > > It seems libflashsupport was dropped out of the default package list in > > > > Fedora 9 and I didn't see any public discussion on the reasons behind this > > > > change (release notes didn't get updated either until recently > > > > unfortunately) Can someone familiar with this change explain the reason? > > > > > > Check the FESCo logs... general reasoning is that it existed solely > > > as a crutch for third-party software, IIRC. > > > > And I'm sure the people who came up with that idea made sure to nicely > > ask Adobe to make their Flash plugins depend on it. Or explained to them > > what that tool did so they can fix their software. > > Adobe Flash 10 doesn't need libflashsupport anymore to work fine on > ALSA ioplug-based backends such as pulse. Good stuff then. Thanks. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
