On Sat, 2006-02-25 at 19:52 -0500, Philippe Rigault wrote: > Due to the lack of a 64-bit flash plugin, the only way to browse > flash-enabled sites currently is through the 32-bit version of firefox (unless > there is a way to use the 32-bit plugin with firefox.x86_64, which I think is > not possible). > > Therefore, I consider the 32-bit version firefox a must have on the x86_64 iso > files (there is no firefox i386.rpm in the DVD of FC5test3). > > I am even recommending the 32-bit version to be the default on x86_64 until a > proper alternative (free flash plugin or 64-bit version distributed by > Macromedia) exists. > > Regards. > I'd suggest you search the archive; there were numerous discussions about this subject. In general: A. Pushing the i386 will reduce any incentive Macromedia might have to actually get off their back side and port their flash player to 64bit. B. Not all people want/use flash. (I for one) C. Having the i386 firefox requires a long line of i386 dependences that people will rather no install. (AKA i386-free installation.) D. Nothing stops anyone from replacing the x86_64 rpms with i386 ones. E. There's a lot of working being done to improve the free flash plug-in. Hopefully it'll improve in the coming months. Gilboa -- fedora-test-list mailing list fedora-test-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list