For the majority of the people reading the list, a short introduction:
Many sites nowadays have banners that roll over the text of the article. In Linux you might have noticed that after the banners move away, they leave blank space behind that cover the text, making it impossible to read the page. Also, the same problem is the cause for site menus that open behind flash animations instead of in front (example: http://www.adobe.com )
This problem is caused by a missing feature called wmode (windowless mode) in the flash-player for linux.
Well, the latest flash-player 10 RC is supposed to have the feature.
There are a few problems though:
0. Flash is still 32 bit. So, to make it work on x86_64, it needs 32 bit libraries of stuff, besides the nspluginwrapper hack Do this: zypper in mozilla-nss-32bit
1. Flash depends on libcurl.so.3. This can be solved by installing libcurl4-32bit ("zypper in libcurl4-32bit") and making a symlink cd /usr/lib/ ln -s libcurl.so.4.1.0 libcurl.so.3
2. Firefox 3.0.1 has a bug that crashes it when running with flash 10rc. Firefox 3.0.3 is supposed to have that bug fixed
If you want to try it, get Flash10rc here: http://labs.adobe.com/downloads/flashplayer10.html Put libflashplayer.so in /usr/lib/browser-plugins/ Run as root (one line): nspluginwrappper --install --verbose /usr/lib/browser- plugins/libflashplayer.so
Here it's a small demo for the wmode feature. http://www.communitymx.com/content/source/E5141/wmodetrans.htm Unfortunately, it still doesn't work well with Firefox 3.0.3 from Factory. I don't know why. At least site menus open in front of flash. I think I'll try Firefox nightly builds (Minefield).
I think that 11.1 should be released with Flash10, because wmode is an important, functional feature for browsing the web. We should be prepared in case they release flash10 before we freeze, or include the latest RC.
Silviu Marin-Caea escribió:
- Flash depends on libcurl.so.3. This can be solved by installing
libcurl4-32bit ("zypper in libcurl4-32bit") and making a symlink cd /usr/lib/ ln -s libcurl.so.4.1.0 libcurl.so.3
argh !!.. no, you dont !! if we have a package that depends on a library that is not there, open a bug report ;) the library SONAME has changed for a reason..
On Friday 03 October 2008 19:09:49 you wrote:
Silviu Marin-Caea escribió:
- Flash depends on libcurl.so.3. This can be solved by installing
libcurl4-32bit ("zypper in libcurl4-32bit") and making a symlink cd /usr/lib/ ln -s libcurl.so.4.1.0 libcurl.so.3
argh !!..
I know.
no, you dont !! if we have a package that depends on a library that is not there, open a bug report ;) the library SONAME has changed for a reason..
This stupid thing is not my own invention:
http://blogs.adobe.com/penguin.swf/2008/08/curl_tradeoffs.html
Silviu Marin-Caea escribió:
This stupid thing is not my own invention:
http://blogs.adobe.com/penguin.swf/2008/08/curl_tradeoffs.html
awwwww..ugly..... yet another reason to spend more resources in gnash... we really need to get rid of this crap ASAP ;)
anyway.. as ugly it is, acoording to the curl author it will work.
http://daniel.haxx.se/blog/2008/08/22/the-hack-will-still-be-useful/
On Sat, 2008-10-04 at 18:03 -0400, Cristian Rodríguez wrote:
awwwww..ugly..... yet another reason to spend more resources in gnash... we really need to get rid of this crap ASAP ;)
If only the various distros (including Novell's) don't seem to think it that way and comfort themself into "supporting" Adobe's [1][2]
Hub
[1] there are also legal problems from patents related to that. [2] this is my personal opinion, not Novell's
Hubert Figuiere escribió:
[1] there are also legal problems from patents related to that.
Yeah, MP3 and video codec patents...
[2] this is my personal opinion, not Novell's
This is my personal opinion as well. ;)
On Sunday 05 October 2008 01:03:12 Cristian Rodríguez wrote:
Silviu Marin-Caea escribió:
This stupid thing is not my own invention:
http://blogs.adobe.com/penguin.swf/2008/08/curl_tradeoffs.html
awwwww..ugly..... yet another reason to spend more resources in gnash... we really need to get rid of this crap ASAP ;)
ASAP might not be before 11.1.
So, the problem I see now is why doesn't Firefox 3.0.3 work properly with Flash10RC and Minefield does? I'm talking about rolling banners. See http://www.zf.ro
Maybe this problem will solve itself by a Flash10release. When that happens, people will notice that FF3.0.3 doesn't work well with it in Linux and perhaps Mozilla will fix it and update to 3.0.4... All this is supposed to happen before SUSE 11.1 is released or else the Mozilla guru from SUSE could take a look at this.
Silviu Marin-Caea schrieb:
On Sunday 05 October 2008 01:03:12 Cristian Rodríguez wrote:
Silviu Marin-Caea escribió:
This stupid thing is not my own invention:
http://blogs.adobe.com/penguin.swf/2008/08/curl_tradeoffs.html
awwwww..ugly..... yet another reason to spend more resources in gnash... we really need to get rid of this crap ASAP ;)
ASAP might not be before 11.1.
So, the problem I see now is why doesn't Firefox 3.0.3 work properly with Flash10RC and Minefield does? I'm talking about rolling banners. See http://www.zf.ro
Maybe this problem will solve itself by a Flash10release. When that happens, people will notice that FF3.0.3 doesn't work well with it in Linux and perhaps Mozilla will fix it and update to 3.0.4... All this is supposed to happen before SUSE 11.1 is released or else the Mozilla guru from SUSE could take a look at this.
Anyone searched bugzilla.mozilla.org about that issue? AFAIK Mozilla and Adobe are working more or less together to fix Flash 10 (and other wmode) issues so I'd expect that someone noticed and reported it already and there might be a reason why it's not working or ported to 3.0.x.
Wolfgang
On Monday 06 October 2008 11:28:49 Wolfgang Rosenauer wrote:
Anyone searched bugzilla.mozilla.org about that issue? AFAIK Mozilla and Adobe are working more or less together to fix Flash 10 (and other wmode) issues so I'd expect that someone noticed and reported it already and there might be a reason why it's not working or ported to 3.0.x.
Is this what you're thinking of? http://blogs.adobe.com/penguin.swf/2008/07/addessing_wmode_crashes.html http://blogs.adobe.com/penguin.swf/2008/09/firefox_302_get_it.html
However, the problem I'm referring to is not about crashing, rather about that wmode does not appear to be working in FF3.0.3.
BTW, the build of Minefield that I'm using is from here: http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/nightly/latest- trunk/firefox-3.1b1pre.en-US.linux-i686.tar.bz2 I have installed it on x86_64, together with all the 32 bit stuff it needs. The demo from this link works as expected, including transparent wmode. http://www.communitymx.com/content/source/E5141/wmodetrans.htm
This is what it's displayed in about:plugins, in both browsers:
FF3.0.3 from SUSE File name: npwrapper.libflashplayer.so Shockwave Flash 10.0 r12
Minefield from Mozilla File name: libflashplayer.so Shockwave Flash 10.0 r12
Silviu Marin-Caea schrieb:
On Monday 06 October 2008 11:28:49 Wolfgang Rosenauer wrote:
Anyone searched bugzilla.mozilla.org about that issue? AFAIK Mozilla and Adobe are working more or less together to fix Flash 10 (and other wmode) issues so I'd expect that someone noticed and reported it already and there might be a reason why it's not working or ported to 3.0.x.
Is this what you're thinking of? http://blogs.adobe.com/penguin.swf/2008/07/addessing_wmode_crashes.html http://blogs.adobe.com/penguin.swf/2008/09/firefox_302_get_it.html
No, I know about these. I was asking for the issue you see that it's not working for you on some (or all?) sites. So why not reporting it to bugzilla.mozilla.org specifying FF 3.0.x and a hint that it's working with 3.1pre?
BTW, the build of Minefield that I'm using is from here: http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/nightly/latest- trunk/firefox-3.1b1pre.en-US.linux-i686.tar.bz2 I have installed it on x86_64, together with all the 32 bit stuff it needs. The demo from this link works as expected, including transparent wmode. http://www.communitymx.com/content/source/E5141/wmodetrans.htm
I don't have installed Flash 10 yet because it seemed quite crashy some weeks ago. Probably it's better now.
Wolfgang
On 06.10.2008 11:17, Wolfgang Rosenauer wrote:
I don't have installed Flash 10 yet because it seemed quite crashy some weeks ago. Probably it's better now.
Flash 10 Beta works well on 32bit openSUSE 11.0 on Firefox 3 from Mozilla (to make reporting crashes easier for me).
On Monday 06 October 2008 14:56:49 Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek wrote:
On 06.10.2008 11:17, Wolfgang Rosenauer wrote:
I don't have installed Flash 10 yet because it seemed quite crashy some weeks ago. Probably it's better now.
Flash 10 Beta works well on 32bit openSUSE 11.0 on Firefox 3 from Mozilla (to make reporting crashes easier for me).
I have installed Flash10RC on my 32bit 11.0, FF3.0.3 and I can confirm too that it works well, rolling banners and all. So it seems there is a problem only with FF3.0.3 from 11.1beta2 x86_64. I'll test with beta3 when it's out.
So, I don't think that reporting to Mozilla bugzilla is in order as long as the same FF version works with Flash10RC on SUSE 11.0 and doesn't work in 11.1beta2.
Maybe it's something related to the x86_64 architecture?
Maybe someone can test Flash10RC with 11.1beta2 on 32 bit.. I'll try to do it myself on Monday in a virtual machine.
On Saturday 11 October 2008 23:33:25 Silviu Marin-Caea wrote:
On Monday 06 October 2008 14:56:49 Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek wrote:
On 06.10.2008 11:17, Wolfgang Rosenauer wrote:
I don't have installed Flash 10 yet because it seemed quite crashy some weeks ago. Probably it's better now.
Flash 10 Beta works well on 32bit openSUSE 11.0 on Firefox 3 from Mozilla (to make reporting crashes easier for me).
I have installed Flash10RC on my 32bit 11.0, FF3.0.3 and I can confirm too that it works well, rolling banners and all. So it seems there is a problem only with FF3.0.3 from 11.1beta2 x86_64. I'll test with beta3 when it's out.
So, I don't think that reporting to Mozilla bugzilla is in order as long as the same FF version works with Flash10RC on SUSE 11.0 and doesn't work in 11.1beta2.
Maybe it's something related to the x86_64 architecture?
Maybe someone can test Flash10RC with 11.1beta2 on 32 bit.. I'll try to do it myself on Monday in a virtual machine.
The state of affairs has not changed in beta4. Flash 10 release does not work as it should in Firefox 3.0.3 x86_64.
I assume that 11.1 will be released with Flash 9. It's a pity, because the wmode feature of Flash 10 fixes a major usability problem of Linux for browsing the web.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=441045
Hi,
Silviu Marin-Caea schrieb:
The state of affairs has not changed in beta4. Flash 10 release does not work as it should in Firefox 3.0.3 x86_64.
nspluginwrapper still has a bug in supporting wmode. AFAICS Flash 10 and Firefox 3.0.3 works correctly wrt wmode on 32bit.
I assume that 11.1 will be released with Flash 9. It's a pity, because the wmode feature of Flash 10 fixes a major usability problem of Linux for browsing the web.
I don't think 11.1 will be shipped with Flash 9 since it has known security issues. http://www.adobe.com/support/security/bulletins/apsb08-18.html
Wolfgang
On Monday 03 November 2008 15:03:31 Wolfgang Rosenauer wrote:
The state of affairs has not changed in beta4. Flash 10 release does not work as it should in Firefox 3.0.3 x86_64.
nspluginwrapper still has a bug in supporting wmode. AFAICS Flash 10 and Firefox 3.0.3 works correctly wrt wmode on 32bit.
There is a 64 bit Flash10alpha that seems to work well with wmode, at least my usual sites do, and this link too: http://www.communitymx.com/content/source/E5141/wmodetrans.htm
nspluginwrapper is not needed anymore.
Known issues for this alpha: http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/flashplayer10/releasenotes_64bit.html#kno...
On Thursday 20 November 2008 10:54:45 Silviu Marin-Caea wrote:
On Monday 03 November 2008 15:03:31 Wolfgang Rosenauer wrote:
The state of affairs has not changed in beta4. Flash 10 release does not work as it should in Firefox 3.0.3 x86_64.
nspluginwrapper still has a bug in supporting wmode. AFAICS Flash 10 and Firefox 3.0.3 works correctly wrt wmode on 32bit.
There is a 64 bit Flash10alpha that seems to work well with wmode, at least my usual sites do, and this link too: http://www.communitymx.com/content/source/E5141/wmodetrans.htm
nspluginwrapper is not needed anymore.
Known issues for this alpha: http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/flashplayer10/releasenotes_64bit.html#kn own
It would be cool to package it in 11.1 along with the 32 bit version. So the user can swap them easily.
On Monday 03 November 2008 15:03:31 Wolfgang Rosenauer wrote:
Hi,
Silviu Marin-Caea schrieb:
The state of affairs has not changed in beta4. Flash 10 release does not work as it should in Firefox 3.0.3 x86_64.
nspluginwrapper still has a bug in supporting wmode. AFAICS Flash 10 and Firefox 3.0.3 works correctly wrt wmode on 32bit.
It seems that nspluginwrapper >=1.1.2 should work with wmode. So can we have at least that, a new version of nspluginwrapper?
On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 04:43:29PM +0200, Silviu Marin-Caea wrote:
On Monday 03 November 2008 15:03:31 Wolfgang Rosenauer wrote:
Hi,
Silviu Marin-Caea schrieb:
The state of affairs has not changed in beta4. Flash 10 release does not work as it should in Firefox 3.0.3 x86_64.
nspluginwrapper still has a bug in supporting wmode. AFAICS Flash 10 and Firefox 3.0.3 works correctly wrt wmode on 32bit.
It seems that nspluginwrapper >=1.1.2 should work with wmode. So can we have at least that, a new version of nspluginwrapper?
... please open a bugreport! :)
Ciao, Marcus
On Thursday 20 November 2008 16:51:43 you wrote:
... please open a bugreport! :)
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=447434
On Friday 03 October 2008 16:29:25 Silviu Marin-Caea wrote:
I think that 11.1 should be released with Flash10, because wmode is an important, functional feature for browsing the web. We should be prepared in case they release flash10 before we freeze, or include the latest RC.
Is there still time to include it in beta3?
* Silviu Marin-Caea [2008-10-17 11:52]:
On Friday 03 October 2008 16:29:25 Silviu Marin-Caea wrote:
I think that 11.1 should be released with Flash10, because wmode is an important, functional feature for browsing the web. We should be prepared in case they release flash10 before we freeze, or include the latest RC.
Is there still time to include it in beta3?
Don't worry, even if not, after the first security hole in Flash 9 the maintenance team has to release an update for Flash 10 anyway. ;-)
Regards, Bernhard
Bernhard Walle schrieb:
- Silviu Marin-Caea [2008-10-17 11:52]:
On Friday 03 October 2008 16:29:25 Silviu Marin-Caea wrote:
I think that 11.1 should be released with Flash10, because wmode is an important, functional feature for browsing the web. We should be prepared in case they release flash10 before we freeze, or include the latest RC.
Is there still time to include it in beta3?
Don't worry, even if not, after the first security hole in Flash 9 the maintenance team has to release an update for Flash 10 anyway. ;-)
Like this: http://www.adobe.com/support/security/bulletins/apsb08-18.html ?
;-) Wolfgang
On Fri, 2008-10-17 at 11:29 +0200, Wolfgang Rosenauer wrote:
Don't worry, even if not, after the first security hole in Flash 9
the
maintenance team has to release an update for Flash 10 anyway. ;-)
Like this: http://www.adobe.com/support/security/bulletins/apsb08-18.html ?
Maybe we should just not ship it :-D
Hub
Hubert Figuiere wrote:
On Fri, 2008-10-17 at 11:29 +0200, Wolfgang Rosenauer wrote:
Don't worry, even if not, after the first security hole in Flash 9
the
maintenance team has to release an update for Flash 10 anyway. ;-)
Like this: http://www.adobe.com/support/security/bulletins/apsb08-18.html ?
Maybe we should just not ship it :-D
Why not? To make even more users upset? To save a few minutes to copy the files and create a new RPM feeding into the update channel? (I know it's probably more than a few minutes but it's still not an issue)
When the OSS community has provided an implementation which can replace Adobe's version we can think about that again IMHO.
Wolfgang
* Wolfgang Rosenauer [2008-10-17 15:48]:
When the OSS community has provided an implementation which can replace Adobe's version we can think about that again IMHO.
But only then. Not when it's 50 % ready like the OSS Java crap (gij and that "plugin", not talking about IcedTea and OpenJDK) that got installed by default.
Regards, Bernhard
-
Bernhard Walle -
Cristian Rodríguez -
Hubert Figuiere -
Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek -
Marcus Meissner -
Silviu Marin-Caea -
Wolfgang Rosenauer