Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | Robert E. Blair |
Date: | Thu, 14 Jun 2007 10:15:18 -0500 |
Content-Type: | multipart/mixed |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
My guess is that /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins is no longer operational. I
believe the right place is /usr/lib/mozilla-seamonkey-1.0.9/plugins or
/usr/lib/firefox-1.5.0.12/ until, of course, the next version of
seamonkey or firefox comes out. This is why I add to ~/.mozilla/plugins
my own personal link to libjavaplugin_oji.so which won't move with the
next release of the browser. I suspect this could be done more
gracefully by redhat.
By the way the virtue of java is that it is platform independent. But
for java many nice things would be only for microsoft windows users, and
of course forget any kind of sophisticated apps in a web based
environment since java runs client side and the only alternative is
rather primitive ecmascript (javascript) or - yes, windows only - thank
god - activeX.
Michael H. Semcheski wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I want to preface this message by ranting a little about java.
> Someone came into my office today, and in the course of our
> conversation, they asked me what java was. I explained it, and they
> asked why people use java... And I tried to explain it, but I had to
> admit that I can't really understand why people use it... Let alone
> why I have to use a java SSL-VPN application!
>
> So anyway, I have been trying and trying to get Sun Java 6 working on
> SL. The command line version seems to work well enough for jgnash,
> which is the only thing I've used it for so far. But the Firefox
> plugin... not quite. Or rather, not at all.
>
> Yum says I have gcj 1.4.2 and java-1.5.0-sun-compat.noarch installed.
> I downloaded the java 6 jre from java.com as a binary installer, which
> unpacks to an rpm and installed it.
>
> I've created symlinks to the sun plugin in /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins,
> mucked with about:config java:java_plugin_library_name.
>
> I really need the Sun JRE, but they don't make it easy, do they? Any
> suggestions?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFGcVuFCDBz0lN+7YcRAk06AJ4i4QUILn0u+DsSjI3EstfVCPfcpACgvQez
j1JM/IFklOKlUgm5mFvkTwk=
=NPtq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
|
|