-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 15:40:34 +0100
"Heiko Wundram (Beenic)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Read this (in the license agreement):
> For the avoidance of doubt, no embedded or device versions of the
> above operating systems, or any other operating systems, are included
> as Authorized Operating Systems.
> 2.1 You may install and use the Software on a single desktop or
> laptop computer that runs an Authorized Operating System. A license
> for the Software may not be shared, installed or used concurrently on
> different computers. """
Actually, flash used to run on FreeBSD's Linux compatibility layer; does
that count as "embedded or device" version of Linux? If yes, does the
same go for Wine on FreeBSD?
If yes again, what about Wine on Linux? Even on Linux, win32-firefox
with win32-flash (within Wine) run much better than Linux-flash itself.
> This is another reason why Flash is bad, bad, bad. Am I repeating
Agree here, but "open-source friendly" companies that promote the use
of flash are much worse. As it seems to be, the reason why people want
to use flash on FreeBSD is youtube in most of cases.
Nikola Lečić = Никола Лечић
fingerprint : FEF3 66AF C90E EDC3 D878 7CDC 956D F4AB A377 1C9B
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
email@example.com mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"