Date: Sat, 25 Jul 2009 17:36:00 +0400 From: Boris Samorodov <bsam@ipt.ru> To: Marc Fonvieille <blackend@freebsd.org> Cc: stable@freebsd.org, Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@iet.unipi.it> Subject: Re: status of flash9/flash10 support in RELENG_7 ? Message-ID: <46928623@ipt.ru> In-Reply-To: <20090725123749.GA26505@abigail.blackend.org> (Marc Fonvieille's message of "Sat\, 25 Jul 2009 14\:37\:49 %2B0200") References: <20090725013500.GC62402@onelab2.iet.unipi.it> <20090725073805.GA11455@abigail.blackend.org> <20090725115525.GA85767@onelab2.iet.unipi.it> <20090725123749.GA26505@abigail.blackend.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Marc Fonvieille <blackend@freebsd.org> writes: > On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 01:55:25PM +0200, Luigi Rizzo wrote: >> i see that for 8.x you suggest using fc10, which is also something i >> tried on RELENG_7 but had similar symptoms. Is there any known reason >> why HEAD and RELENG_7 should be different in terms of linux_base support ? > > You should ask this question to bsam (CCed) which is our linux_base > expert. There are two cases here. The first one is resolving issue. I'm not sure if all the needed changes were done to RELENG_7 to let resolving work with linux_base-f10. If any linux port/application that uses resolving (i.e. www/linux-firefox) work at RELENG_7 then an MFC has been done. But that issue should not influence flashplugin. The second one (an absence of some syscalls) will not be resolved at RELENG_7 due to an ABI changes. I'm not aware of linux applications affected though. May be it's print/acroread9 but I'm not sure. As for the original question. I don't use flash so can't be very helpful here. But there are reports at emulation@ ML that both linux-f8-flashplugin10 and linux-f10-flashplugin10 work better then flashplugin[7|9]. -- WBR, bsam
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?46928623>