-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 An odd feature of the list of supported linuxen for chrome is that it indicates fedora 14 (not fedora 14+). The current release of fedora is 18 and I didn't notice a warning on my fedora installs. I wonder if this is just a typo?
On 04/02/2013 04:09 AM, Dr Andrew C Aitchison wrote: > On Mon, 1 Apr 2013, Robert Blair wrote: > >> Slightly off topic but related: now that 1) adobe is no longer >> supporting flash for linux firefox plugins and 2) google is no longer >> supporting google-chrome on SL, do we have a flash crisis? Is there a >> plan to deal with this by TUV? > > 1) According to > http://www.adobe.com/devnet/flashplatform/whitepapers/roadmap.html > Adobe will support non-pepper flash 11.2 for five years from release, > so we have another four years and it isn't a crisis yet. > > 2) For those who haven't heard this, some links: > http://support.google.com/chrome/bin/answer.py?hl=en-GB&answer=95411 > http://www.muktware.com/5203/google-says-red-hat-enterprise-linux-6-obsolete > > > Seems that the issue is Google want to use C++11 / gcc4.6 which > is not standard on RHEL6/SL6. > > (I'm out of the loop but "developers ... prefer the new C++11 for the > obvious security reasons" comes as a suprise to me.) > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJRWvy+AAoJEPQM1KNWz8QaY/YH/3JCWFmJVrlURvb3tvfJz1/y bH0hhRBAM5/VwjgKRI2UFnzhjFcTh4e0ISZ0zVVvZnsmCEXp2yV11WnpprhVqWqH BOyA6OjZnVwiB36BtKKoIM8wnOLeFOKvp0IjKaCpN8E5X6SoLGqJhFVcRH6PlwUe A0S8m8II4oMwRb9P09MEVECpHgS5HGU9Qajcz4o2SXg2/ICDdce4yyQcnQaoktmM ahyxBL+KqtlJEXHVI3aVVVtiIs+W6zqe2WRT1z2iyn/wrdjA6e+e8FUITtIS+8Al PO1LlxbpRSX32BcR2clRkthn7JBuxutfX9TCWpEETj5qmQGTA93oPLTpidFnBLQ= =+3SU -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
<<attachment: reb.vcf>>
