SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS Archives

October 2011

SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS@LISTSERV.FNAL.GOV
Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
Re: Flash plugin
From:
Dag Wieers <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Dag Wieers <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 6 Oct 2011 19:08:39 +0200
Content-Type:
TEXT/PLAIN
Parts/Attachments:
TEXT/PLAIN (26 lines) 
On Thu, 6 Oct 2011, Dr Andrew C Aitchison wrote:

> On Thu, 6 Oct 2011, Dag Wieers wrote:
>
>>  RPMforge provides already the (beta) 64bit flash-plugin, so there's no
>>  need to wait for it. In this case the 64bit is installed, so there is no
>>  reason to install the 32bit. Unless you want to replace the 64bit by the
>>  32bit.
>
> Hmm. Unless I am using an out of date mirror RPMforge has
> flash-plugin.x86_64      11.0.1.129-0.1.el6.rf	    rpmforge
>
> whereas the adobe-linux-i386 repo has
> flash-plugin.i386        11.0.1.152-release         @adobe-linux-i386
> (Build Date: Sat 24 Sep 2011 02:45:27 AM BST).

So, why would one replace a 64bit flash-plugin with a 32bit one ?

If the 64bit version was used, it simply would have worked.

-- 
-- dag wieers, [log in to unmask], http://dag.wieers.com/
-- dagit linux solutions, [log in to unmask], http://dagit.net/

[Any errors in spelling, tact or fact are transmission errors]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2