On Thu, 6 Oct 2011, Dr Andrew C Aitchison wrote:
On Thu, 6 Oct 2011, Dag Wieers wrote:
On Thu, 6 Oct 2011, Dr Andrew C Aitchison wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Oct 2011, Dag Wieers wrote:
>
> > RPMforge provides already the (beta) 64bit flash-plugin, so there's
> > no
> > need to wait for it. In this case the 64bit is installed, so there is
> > no
> > reason to install the 32bit. Unless you want to replace the 64bit by
> > the
> > 32bit.
>
> Hmm. Unless I am using an out of date mirror RPMforge has
> flash-plugin.x86_64 11.0.1.129-0.1.el6.rf rpmforge
>
> whereas the adobe-linux-i386 repo has
> flash-plugin.i386 11.0.1.152-release @adobe-linux-i386
> (Build Date: Sat 24 Sep 2011 02:45:27 AM BST).
So, why would one replace a 64bit flash-plugin with a 32bit one ?
Not so much that I want to - rather that the 32 bit adobe repo was
already enabled from when the machine was running SL5 and I have
only now looked for the adobe-linux-x86_64 repo.
My real point was that the rpmforge plugin is presumably out of
date if the adobe repo has a newer plugin with a higher release number.
It's quite hard to release before Adobe.
--
-- dag wieers, [email protected], http://dag.wieers.com/
-- dagit linux solutions, [email protected], http://dagit.net/
[Any errors in spelling, tact or fact are transmission errors]
