Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 26 Sep 2007 08:39:05 -0500
From:      eculp@encontacto.net
To:        freebsd-ports <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re:  Re: latest firefox. linux-flashplugin and nspluginwrapper don't want to work together.
Message-ID:  <20070926083905.zr6eeisfswkg4c8c@intranet.encontacto.net>
In-Reply-To: <46FA5A0B.2030404@dva.dyndns.org>
References:  <20070925163539.pgse608uso00sw80@intranet.encontacto.net> <46FA5A0B.2030404@dva.dyndns.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Quoting "Boris S." <bst2006@dva.dyndns.org>:

> eculp@encontacto.net schrieb:
>> Also, I would really like to know if anyone has flash9 working with =20
>> somewhat reasonable stability and sound or a way to make the =20
>> server-side think that flash7 is flash8 or above?  There are more =20
>> and more sites asking for flash8+ and very few that won't work with =20
>> flash7.
>
>
> Because of the raising demand of flash9 i switched yesterday to =20
> linux-firefox-2.0.0.7 and flash9.
> This combination is much more stable and compatible than bsd-firefox =20
> with flash6 or 7 and wrapper.
> I'm using -CURRENT (AMD64) as of 21. Sept., with Linuxulator =20
> switched to "2.6.16" Mode and installed linux_base-fc6.
> I did't test sound and things like youtube didn't work. But I'm very =20
> happy now because MY often visited websites are much more useable now.

Thanks a lot Boris.  That is the same problem I'm seeing, the =20
proliferation of flash for links on websites, that really sucks but .. =20
..

I'll give all a try once I get upgraded to current on this machine.

ed
> Boris
>
>




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070926083905.zr6eeisfswkg4c8c>