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:
From:
Dag Wieers <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Dag Wieers <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 7 Oct 2011 01:53:53 +0200
Content-Type:
TEXT/PLAIN
Parts/Attachments:
TEXT/PLAIN (31 lines)
On Fri, 7 Oct 2011, JR van Rensburg wrote:

> On Fri, 2011-10-07 at 01:19 +0200, Dag Wieers wrote:
>
>> It's quite hard to release before Adobe.
>
> The way I understand it from pre 64-bit Flash, Adobe weren't responsible
> for the 64-bit Flash development and it came with the caveat that it
> won't be updated from their repo.
> This meant that you only got the 32-bit plugin from adobe.

The issue is mixing 32bit and 64bit packages. The exact same error would 
have happened if you had the old 32bit flash-plugin installed, and would 
install the 64bit new plugin.

I don't see exactly what everything else has to do with anything. Tomorrow 
the 11.0.1.152 will be available from Repoforge, for both 32bit and 64bit. 
And any issues are resolved, but we can never proactively prevent 
something we cannot control. If tomorrow Adobe releases a newer 32bit RPM 
and people use that repository on 64bit using the Repoforge 64bit package, 
we could not have prevented that...

Without Adobe Flash the world would be much more simple, Steve Jobs knew 
that :)

-- 
-- 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