SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS Archives

April 2013

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:
From:
Dr Andrew C Aitchison <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Dr Andrew C Aitchison <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 2 Apr 2013 10:09:45 +0100
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (26 lines)
On Mon, 1 Apr 2013, Robert Blair wrote:

> Slightly off topic but related:  now that 1) adobe is no longer
> supporting flash for linux firefox plugins and 2) google is no longer
> supporting google-chrome on SL, do we have a flash crisis?  Is there a
> plan to deal with this by TUV?

1) According to 
http://www.adobe.com/devnet/flashplatform/whitepapers/roadmap.html
Adobe will support non-pepper flash 11.2 for five years from release,
so we have another four years and it isn't a crisis yet.

2) For those who haven't heard this, some links:
http://support.google.com/chrome/bin/answer.py?hl=en-GB&answer=95411
http://www.muktware.com/5203/google-says-red-hat-enterprise-linux-6-obsolete

Seems that the issue is Google want to use C++11 / gcc4.6 which
is not standard on RHEL6/SL6.

(I'm out of the loop but "developers ... prefer the new C++11 for 
the obvious security reasons" comes as a suprise to me.)

-- 
Dr. Andrew C. Aitchison		Computer Officer, DPMMS, Cambridge
[log in to unmask]	http://www.dpmms.cam.ac.uk/~werdna

ATOM RSS1 RSS2