Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 03:22:42 +0900 (JST) From: Norikatsu Shigemura <nork@FreeBSD.org> To: Yu-Shun Wang <yushunwa@ISI.EDU> Cc: gnome@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: which flash? (plugins, wrappers) Message-ID: <200311201822.hAKIMg8X016693@sakura.ninth-nine.com> In-Reply-To: <3FBD02FA.3080805@isi.edu> References: <200311191611.hAJGBcaa078764@sakura.ninth-nine.com> <3FBC1F44.6060309@isi.edu> <200311200218.hAK2Icab093548@sakura.ninth-nine.com> <3FBD02FA.3080805@isi.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 20 Nov 2003 10:07:54 -0800 Yu-Shun Wang <yushunwa@ISI.EDU> wrote: > > Maybe, flashpluginwrapper-0.20021113 and linux-flashplugin-5.0r51. > > Or new linuxpluginwrapper-20031120(not committed) and > > linux-flashplugin6-6.0r79. > Two short questions: > - Should I uninstall one before install another? Yes. Because of CONFLICTS these ports on runtime. > - Is it the intention to have a generic linux plugin wrapper (hence > the name)? Or I'd suggest following the naming convention of > flashpluginwrapperX (X=6 in this case) rather than having yet > another name which is IMHO not very intuitive for someone > not following the list. :-) Linux Plugin Wrapper supports Flash6 and Acrobat5. In theory, it has a availability which is support other plugins for linux. > >>My current browser is mozilla 1.5, but will probably upgrade to > >>1.6a soon. > > Please wait until commit linuxpluginwrapper, if you use Flash6. > Sure. And thanks for the good works! Committed. Please!
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200311201822.hAKIMg8X016693>