On Tue, 18 Sep 2007, Dominique Leuenberger wrote: > >>> On Tue, Sep 18, 2007 at 6:32 PM, Martin Schlander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>> wrote: > > Den Tuesday 18 September 2007 16:27:22 skrev Gregg Nicholas: > >> > I reopened > >> > [Bug 264228] nspluginwrapper + java plugin problems > >> > [Bug 288750] Home bank issues with java+firefox on x86_64 > >> > to get a final decision. I know it's really late, but a 64bit system > >> > without a working firefox/java combination is a blocker in my eyes. > >> > > >> I have to agree with Andreas Vetter. Firefox/java/flash should simply > >> work, without manual intervention, on any gui installation (even x86_64). > >> In my opinion, the decision to go with only OSS solutions - even though > >> they don't work right - is likely to push end-users toward other > >> distributions. > > > > As it can be seen from my bugreports that avetter reopened I share the > > opinion > > that 32-bit Firefox should be shipped. Especially since > > software.opensuse.org > > > > has no "warning" about downloading the x86_64 version. > > > > However I don't think the decision has anything to do with ideology. When > > people install x86_64 they don't want 32-bit Firefox - they want to run > > full > > 64-bit so they can enjoy all the imaginatory performance improvements. Now > > we > > > > even have 64-bit OOo.. > > > > Flash works with nspluginwrapper with 64-bit Firefox - I don't know how > > many > > people actually come across java webapplets - personally I only need it for > > homebanking - but that of course is enough to make me install 32-bit > > Firefox - which I tested and "downgrading" ran without incident, except for > > me having to remove classpath-webplugin - and that issue will be fixed. > > I agree completely: flash works flawless with the nspluginwrapper and > Java is one of the things I never need on a website (even my bank > webinterfaces don't use it anymore).
I agree, it's not very much used on newer webpages, but a lot of older stuff is in Java. Especially a lot of physics related material for our students is Java. Additionally a lot of web interfaces for hardware use Java (tape libraries, storage systems, uninteruptible power supplies, ...). > Also think about other impacts having a 32bit firefox imposes: I'm > maintaining packages of a not to be called by name Video Client, and we > offer a plugin for Firefox. Of course, when installing 64bit Video > Client, the 64bit plugin get's installed. Having a 32bit version of > Firefox forces the user also to 'downgrade' a lot of other applications. Yes that's true, that's the reason I didn't use this plugin in older suse distros. > I think such cases have to be clear for everybody: if you need Java and > you really can't live without it, go for 32bit. Yast/whatever tool and > the Documentation should offer an easy way for this. And then it should > clearly be noted that many other things might get broken. For those > users, a pure 32bit system might be better suitable then (or maybe a VM) -- Andreas Vetter Fakultaet fuer Physik und Astronomie Universitaet Wuerzburg --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
