Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2008 18:27:07 -0500 From: Derek Graham <derek.graham@att.net> To: RW <fbsd06@mlists.homeunix.com> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: linux-flashplugin9 Restricted? Message-ID: <200806021827.08144.derek.graham@att.net> In-Reply-To: <20080603000811.3aae5319@gumby.homeunix.com.> References: <200806021609.58980.derek.graham@att.net> <20080603000811.3aae5319@gumby.homeunix.com.>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
on Monday 02 June 2008Monday 02 June 2008 RW RW <fbsd06@mlists.homeunix.com> wrote: > On Mon, 2 Jun 2008 16:09:58 -0500 > > Derek Graham <derek.graham@att.net> wrote: > > from freshports.org: > > >> 2006-04-08 > > >> Affects: users of www/linux-flashplugin* > > >> Author: hrs@FreeBSD.org > > >> Reason: > > >> These ports have been removed because the End User License > > >> Agreement explicitly forbids to run the Flash Player on FreeBSD. > > >> For more details, see > > >> http://www.macromedia.com/shockwave/download/license/desktop/. > > > > I found this odd, I remember seeing an email from adobe someone > > posted that said that they do not support freebsd but they do not > > forbid users to use flash if they can get it working. > > Note that this entry is dated 2006. The flash ports were temporarily > removed and then reinstated shortly after. This is not an issue, as far > as I know. > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" Then why do they still show up as Restricted in portfresh and ports? 7 is almost useless anyway since most sites use 9 now, and 9 is not even worth the time, flash almost is a waste of time installing :p Sincerely, Derek A. Graham
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200806021827.08144.derek.graham>