Re: Why not use swfdec-mozilla?
The main problem [with gnash on OLPC] I've had so far is getting the Gstreamer Ugly plugins set (non-FOSS plugins, including the MP3 decoder) installed properly on XO 8.2.0 via Yum because the Gstreamer in 8.2.0's repository is some kind of mishmash from the older Fedora 8 version, not the one from Fedora 9 which XO OS 8.2.0 is based on. Because of this, installing Gstreamer plugins ugly via yum causes a lot of complaints and it doesn't really get installed and updated properly. (I do believe the build team didn't upgrade gstreamer repository in 8.2.0 to the latest packages because the latest version had problems with the XO's camera) This doesn't look like a gnash problem -- more like a problem with the 8.2.0 repos. Let me guess -- OLPC's repo doesn't ship or support the ugly plugins, due to patent issues, and users can't usefully piggyback on the Fedorarepo's ugly plugins because OLPC used a back-rev gstreamer? Will this issue be fixed for 8.2.1's repos? For 9.1? Bug #8982 is related to this problem; #8504 seems to be this ticket. John ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Why not use swfdec-mozilla?
The main problem [with gnash on OLPC] I've had so far is getting the Gstreamer Ugly plugins set (non-FOSS plugins, including the MP3 decoder) installed properly on XO 8.2.0 via Yum because the Gstreamer in 8.2.0's repository is some kind of mishmash from the older Fedora 8 version, not the one from Fedora 9 which XO OS 8.2.0 is based on. Because of this, installing Gstreamer plugins ugly via yum causes a lot of complaints and it doesn't really get installed and updated properly. (I do believe the build team didn't upgrade gstreamer repository in 8.2.0 to the latest packages because the latest version had problems with the XO's camera) This doesn't look like a gnash problem -- more like a problem with the 8.2.0 repos. Let me guess -- OLPC's repo doesn't ship or support the ugly plugins, due to patent issues, and users can't usefully piggyback on the Fedorarepo's ugly plugins because OLPC used a back-rev gstreamer? Will this issue be fixed for 8.2.1's repos? For 9.1? Bug #8982 is related to this problem; #8504 seems to be this ticket. 9.1 based on Fedora 10 should be able to use the standard rpmfusion for Fedora 10. I'm not sure about 8.2 but I would have thought it might be close enough to use the Fedora 9 rpmfusion repo. Peter ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Why not use swfdec-mozilla?
Peter Robinson writes: I've found it very cpu intensive on Fedora 9 and 10 with a penryn dual core processor. It basically pins one of the cores to 100% CPU That could be good. 70% would be more worrisome, because we'd have to assume the CPU was really doing the rendering. At 100%, it becomes reasonable to guess that the code does a busy-wait spin after the rendering. Maybe it only needs 2% of your CPU, and the rest is just being wasted because you have it. ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Why not use swfdec-mozilla? (was Re: Installing Flash on the OLPC)
On Thu, Jan 1, 2009 at 9:14 PM, Brian Pepple bpep...@fedoraproject.org wrote: Quick clarification. We discussed making swfdec installed by default during the development of Fedora 9, but decided against doing so since we felt it wasn't quite ready for that. Ah, thanks for the clarification, I don't run Fedora so I wouldn't know :) I'm not sure if it was considered, but as the maintainer of swfdec in Fedora I can state that swfdec is very cpu-intensive, and I have my doubts whether the performance on the XO would be comparable to gnash's, though it might be worth investigating. That has been my experience too, but I always thought that the CPU-intensive stuff was only for complex Flash-9 things, and because my ATI open source drivers sucked ;p I guess I should compare gnash/swfdec/adobe flash performance-wise too. -- ~Nirbheek Chauhan ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Why not use swfdec-mozilla? (was Re: Installing Flash on the OLPC)
I'm not sure if it was considered, but as the maintainer of swfdec in Fedora I can state that swfdec is very cpu-intensive, and I have my doubts whether the performance on the XO would be comparable to gnash's, though it might be worth investigating. That has been my experience too, but I always thought that the CPU-intensive stuff was only for complex Flash-9 things, and because my ATI open source drivers sucked ;p I don't believe its a video driver issue as I've seen it on both nvidia and intel using the default open source drivers included in Fedora. Peter ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Why not use swfdec-mozilla? (was Re: Installing Flash on the OLPC)
Hello everyone,
(top-posting due to tangent nature of discussion)
Just a thought here, in my experience, swfdec[1] works far better than
gnash for flash websites; why not use that? There's a Firefox/Gecko
plugin called swfdec-mozilla which works beautifully.
swfdec{,-mozilla} use gstreamer, are LGPLed, and support most of the
Flash 9 features whereas gnash supports only a few of the Flash 9
features. swfdec is also the default Flash player on Fedora, and is
the preferred flash player on Ubuntu.
Were there some specific problems with using swfdec? Or was it not
under consideration due to some factors?
On Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 5:11 AM, S Page i...@skierpage.com wrote:
Dear genesee, Carlos Nazareno, Everybody,
gently Many more people are going to read
http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Adobe_Flash page than follow this mailing
list. Your effect on XO users by only answering problems here is
limited, you're just making the smart smarter still.
--
~Nirbheek Chauhan
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Why not use swfdec-mozilla? (was Re: Installing Flash on the OLPC)
On Thu, 2009-01-01 at 14:16 +0530, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
swfdec{,-mozilla} use gstreamer, are LGPLed, and support most of the
Flash 9 features whereas gnash supports only a few of the Flash 9
features. swfdec is also the default Flash player on Fedora, and is
the preferred flash player on Ubuntu.
Quick clarification. We discussed making swfdec installed by default
during the development of Fedora 9, but decided against doing so since
we felt it wasn't quite ready for that.
Were there some specific problems with using swfdec? Or was it not
under consideration due to some factors?
I'm not sure if it was considered, but as the maintainer of swfdec in
Fedora I can state that swfdec is very cpu-intensive, and I have my
doubts whether the performance on the XO would be comparable to gnash's,
though it might be worth investigating.
Later,
/B
--
Brian Pepple bpep...@fedoraproject.org
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Bpepple
gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 810CC15E
BD5E 6F9E 8688 E668 8F5B CBDE 326A E936 810C C15E
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Why not use swfdec-mozilla?
Hi Nirbheek!
swfdec{,-mozilla} use gstreamer, are LGPLed, and support most of the
I've never really tried Swfdec before, but if it also uses Gstreamer
for decoding SWF sound (almost always encoded in MP3), we'd still end
up with the same problem as that currently experienced in getting
sound to work with Gnash on the XO.
The main problem I've had so far is getting the Gstreamer Ugly plugins
set (non-FOSS plugins, including the MP3 decoder) installed properly
on XO 8.2.0 via Yum because the Gstreamer in 8.2.0's repository is
some kind of mishmash from the older Fedora 8 version, not the one
from Fedora 9 which XO OS 8.2.0 is based on.
Because of this, installing Gstreamer plugins ugly via yum causes a
lot of complaints and it doesn't really get installed and updated
properly. (I do believe the build team didn't upgrade gstreamer
repository in 8.2.0 to the latest packages because the latest version
had problems with the XO's camera)
And since I'm rather new to Linux, recompiling Gnash with MP3 sound
running is currently beyond my ken.
It would be really cool if we could update the Gnash page with a
dummy's guide to enabling sound for Gnash if the team is strongly
committed to libre (FOSS) vs gratis (Free, but proprietary --
something I personally have no problem with as my distro of choice is
Linux Mint ;P).
Anyway, the current frustrating dillema is that it's so much easier to
just install the Adobe Flash plugin than to get sound working with
Gnash on the XO, and this is really wrong on so many levels if OLPC is
trying promote the use of Gnash as the XO OS's default flash media
player.
Btw, any chance of slipping in Gnash 0.8.4 for the next build?
Cheers!
-Naz
--
Carlos Nazareno
http://www.object404.com
--
interactive media specialist
zen graffiti studios
http://www.zengraffiti.com
--
Philippine Flash ActionScripters
http://www.phlashers.com
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Why not use swfdec-mozilla? (was Re: Installing Flash on the OLPC)
swfdec{,-mozilla} use gstreamer, are LGPLed, and support most of the
Flash 9 features whereas gnash supports only a few of the Flash 9
features. swfdec is also the default Flash player on Fedora, and is
the preferred flash player on Ubuntu.
Quick clarification. We discussed making swfdec installed by default
during the development of Fedora 9, but decided against doing so since
we felt it wasn't quite ready for that.
Were there some specific problems with using swfdec? Or was it not
under consideration due to some factors?
I'm not sure if it was considered, but as the maintainer of swfdec in
Fedora I can state that swfdec is very cpu-intensive, and I have my
doubts whether the performance on the XO would be comparable to gnash's,
though it might be worth investigating.
I've found it very cpu intensive on Fedora 9 and 10 with a penryn dual
core processor. It basically pins one of the cores to 100% CPU but if
I download the video by saving it from the properties box within the
plugin I don't see that issue using the swfdec-gnome player so there's
probably some low hanging fruit within the actual plugin that might be
able to improve the problem easily for someone that knows where to
look.
Peter
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
