Quoting songbird (songb...@anthive.com):
> David Wright wrote:
> ...
> > someone to answer. To spell it out, I would like to click on a youtube
> > link from a google search and read the video's metadata and any
> > comments without immediately seeing the progress bar vacuuming up
> > 500MB worth o
David Wright wrote:
...
> someone to answer. To spell it out, I would like to click on a youtube
> link from a google search and read the video's metadata and any
> comments without immediately seeing the progress bar vacuuming up
> 500MB worth of my monthly bandwidth.
i don't know of anything w
Quoting Curt (cu...@free.fr):
> On 2015-02-10, David Wright wrote:
> > [...] To spell it out, I would like to click on a youtube
> > link from a google search and read the video's metadata and any
> > comments without immediately seeing the progress bar vacuuming up
> > 500MB worth of my monthly b
On Tue, 10 Feb 2015 11:16:21 -0500
Michael Graham wrote:
Hello Michael,
>fixed it but restarting wasn't enough.
Strange indeed. Still, all sorted now, so it's moot.
--
Regards _
/ ) "The blindingly obvious is
/ _)radnever immediately apparent"
Is she real
On 10 February 2015 at 10:42, Brad Rogers wrote:
> If you only updated the flashplayer, without clearing the copy Ff was
> already using from RAM, then of course it's going to continue using the
> old version.
>
> All you needed to do was stop/restart Ff.
A reboot never fixed it but the crazy ren
On Tue, 10 Feb 2015 10:05:29 -0500
Michael Graham wrote:
Hello Michael,
>Does firefox have a cache of the details somewhere that this magic
>trick has caused to reload? In any case the issue is gone.
If you only updated the flashplayer, without clearing the copy Ff was
already using from RAM,
On Tue, 10 Feb 2015 15:03:57 +
Lisi Reisz wrote:
Hello Lisi,
>So sites continue to complain or even refue to run.
Some, yes. Mostly because such sites require facilities not available in
the Linux version of flashplayer. Or, at the very least, assume Linux
can't handle flash(0). IMU that
On 2015-02-10, David Wright wrote:
>>
>> That's what I said (in so many words).
>
> I'm sorry if you feel that I have trodden on your toes or plagiarised
> your post. However, I need to illustrate the problem that I would love
> someone to answer. To spell it out, I would like to click on a youtu
On 2015-02-10, Michael Graham wrote:
> I managed to fix my issue but I suspect that it was more of a
> coincidence than anything else. I move the file out of the way,
> restarted firefox, confirmed in about:plugins that the plugin was
> gone, moved the file back, restarted firefox. Ta da!
This
Quoting Curt (cu...@free.fr):
> On 2015-02-10, David Wright wrote:
> > Quoting Curt (cu...@free.fr):
> >>
> >> I updated to the latest version but still get security warnings (and
> >> have to click on "allow" or something of the kind).
> >
> > I rather enjoy this misfeature. It means I can click
I managed to fix my issue but I suspect that it was more of a
coincidence than anything else. I move the file out of the way,
restarted firefox, confirmed in about:plugins that the plugin was
gone, moved the file back, restarted firefox. Ta da!
Does firefox have a cache of the details somewhere t
On Monday 09 February 2015 16:29:29 Brad Rogers wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Feb 2015 16:07:51 + (UTC)
> Glyn Astill wrote:
>
> Hello Glyn,
>
> >I think the issue is that the flash plugin version stops at
> >11.2 and there's been no further version.
>
> Adobe continue to backport security updates to the
On 2015-02-10, David Wright wrote:
> Quoting Curt (cu...@free.fr):
>>
>> I updated to the latest version but still get security warnings (and
>> have to click on "allow" or something of the kind).
>
> I rather enjoy this misfeature. It means I can click around those
>
That's what I said (in so m
Quoting Curt (cu...@free.fr):
>
> I updated to the latest version but still get security warnings (and
> have to click on "allow" or something of the kind).
I rather enjoy this misfeature. It means I can click around those
youtube playlists without the movies immediately playing.
And lots of adve
On 2015-02-10, Greg Madden wrote:
> /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins/libflashplayer.so
>
Is this terse follow-up meant to suggest I put a copy of libflashplayer.so in
/usr/lib/mozilla/plugins in order to suppress the unwarranted warning
messages?
Maybe I should just try it and see.
But I rather like
On Tuesday 10 February 2015 10:14:24 AM Greg Madden wrote:
> /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins/libflashplayer.so
>
> On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 11:12 PM, Curt wrote:
> > On 2015-02-10, Michael Graham wrote:
> >> But Iceweasel is still reporting the previous version:
> >>
> >> File: libflashplayer.so
> >> Pa
On this web page is not aviable:
https://packages.debian.org/squeeze/flashplugin-nonfree Error Package not
available in this suite.
What that? :-)
Regards
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.
You can also try https://github.com/i-rinat/freshplayerplugin
so you can use pepperflash (the chrome flashplayer) with firefox or
something else.
Deb packages are also available:
http://www.webupd8.org/2014/05/install-fresh-player-plugin-in-ubuntu.html
Regards,
Basti
On 10.02.2015 10:14, Greg Ma
/usr/lib/mozilla/plugins/libflashplayer.so
On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 11:12 PM, Curt wrote:
> On 2015-02-10, Michael Graham wrote:
>
>> But Iceweasel is still reporting the previous version:
>>
>> File: libflashplayer.so
>> Path: /usr/lib/flashplugin-nonfree/libflashplayer.so
>> Version: 11.2.202.44
On 2015-02-10, Michael Graham wrote:
> But Iceweasel is still reporting the previous version:
>
> File: libflashplayer.so
> Path: /usr/lib/flashplugin-nonfree/libflashplayer.so
> Version: 11.2.202.440
> State: Enabled (STATE_VULNERABLE_UPDATE_AVAILABLE)
> Shockwave Flash 11.2 r202
>
> Does anyone
I use Squeeze LTS
Adobe has security updates to flash, Shockwave Flash 11.2 r202.442, it
is a manual install.
greg
On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 4:09 PM, Michael Graham wrote:
> Somewhat related to this, I've been having a problem where my system reports:
>
> $ sudo update-flashplugin-nonfree --stat
Somewhat related to this, I've been having a problem where my system reports:
$ sudo update-flashplugin-nonfree --status
Flash Player version installed on this system : 11.2.202.442
Flash Player version available on upstream site: 11.2.202.442
But Iceweasel is still reporting the previous versio
On 02/09/2015 11:00 AM, Hans wrote:
When you want to update java, then download jave, and do as above mentioned.
This will create a java package, which you then can install by using "dpkg -i
oracle-whatever*.deb".
That is just half the battle to install Oracle Java. There are all of
the alter
On Mon, 2/9/15, Hans wrote:
Subject: Re: [OT?]Squeeze: update Flashplugin?
To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Date: Monday, February 9, 2015, 10:00 AM
>
> I would also like the answer to this question. I recently tried to update
> flash on my squeeze install according to instr
On 2015-02-09, Hans wrote:
>
> I believe "dpkg-reconfigure flashplugin-nonfree" will download and install
> the
> latest flashplugin from adobe.
>
I thought the command was
update-flashplugin-nonfree --install
Maybe it's six of one, half a dozen of the other.
However, I remember something ab
Hi,
there is no update-flashplugin-nonfree on Squeeze but there is a simple
shell script.
I think it would run also on squeeze.
Regards,
basti
On 09.02.2015 16:55, Jerome BENOIT wrote:
> Hello,
>
> on Wheezy, the flash plugin can be updated as root with
>
> update-flashplugin-nonfree
>
>
> I do
On Mon, 9 Feb 2015 16:07:51 + (UTC)
Glyn Astill wrote:
Hello Glyn,
>I think the issue is that the flash plugin version stops at
>11.2 and there's been no further version.
Adobe continue to backport security updates to the Linux version of
their flash player(1). New capabilities etc. do no
- Original Message -
> From: Jerome BENOIT
> To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
> Cc:
> Sent: Monday, 9 February 2015, 15:55
> Subject: Re: [OT?]Squeeze: update Flashplugin?
>
> Hello,
>
> on Wheezy, the flash plugin can be updated as root with
>
> upd
>
> I would also like the answer to this question. I recently tried to update
> flash on my squeeze install according to instructions I had carefully saved
> from the last time I updated. Here's the command I used:
>
> $ fakeroot make-jpkg jre-7u10-linux-i586.tar.gz
>
> And it came back somet
Hello,
on Wheezy, the flash plugin can be updated as root with
update-flashplugin-nonfree
I do not know if this update tool exist on Squeeze.
hth,
Jerome
On 09/02/15 16:32, antispammbox-debian wrote:
>
>
> Hi all
>
> It's possible update FlashPlugin in Squeeze?
> Thanks
>
> Regards
>
>
On Mon, 2/9/15, antispammbox-debian wrote:
Subject: [OT?]Squeeze: update Flashplugin?
To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Date: Monday, February 9, 2015, 9:32 AM
> Hi all
> It's possible update FlashPlugin in Squeeze?
> Thank
Hi all
It's possible update FlashPlugin in Squeeze?
Thanks
Regards
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/7006767CFF2C4D019891EE55FE2A80DB@rx
32 matches
Mail list logo
