On 16.07.2011 15:17, Ahmad Samir wrote: > On 16 July 2011 14:02, Ahmad Samir <[email protected]> wrote: >> On 16 July 2011 11:11, Anssi Hannula <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On 15.07.2011 11:10, Ahmad Samir wrote: >>>> Hello. >>>> >>>> As you've seen the thread, posted by Charles A Edwards, there's a new >>>> version of flash which has native 64bit support, it's still in beta >>>> but seems to work well, some questions: >>>> - Any objections about offering it in mga1? on x86_64 only and keeping >>>> the 32bit stable one as is for now; not having to install >>>> nspluginwrapper or a 32bit browser on a 64bit system is an >>>> improvement, IMHO. >>>> >>>> - For Cauldron: >>>> o Do we ship the 11 beta1 for both arch? >>>> o Just x86_64 and keep the 32bit stable flash for now >>>> o Keep the 32bit stable and create another spec (Name: >>>> flash-player-pluing11) for 11 beta1? this way 32bit users will have a >>>> choice to install the version they want. >>>> >>>> WDYT? >>> >>> I'd provide it as 'flash-player-plugin11' or 'flash-player-plugin-beta' >>> for both cauldron and mga1. >>> >> >> I had started working on flash-player-plugin11 yesterday (based on the >> current spec and the old PLF flash-player10.2). >> > > I've imported it in Cauldron. > > @Anssi (since you worked on the flash spec the most), please review, > feel free to fix anything I missed.
I removed an unwanted old obsoletes and made conflicts unversioned (as it indeed conflicts with all versions). Otherwise looks ok if it works. -- Anssi Hannula
