Re: Lack of Flash support is no longer acceptable. Bounty established...
Chad Perrin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Actually, a more probable explanation is simply that Sun -- as a monolithic economic power base in the form of a tech corporation -- has more influence with Adobe than what Adobe execs probably see (however inaccurately) as a fractious bunch of hobbyists. That, or Sun paid them to port it. DES -- Dag-Erling Smørgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-advocacy To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Lack of Flash support is no longer acceptable. Bounty established...
On Thu, Jul 03, 2008 at 01:09:21PM +0400, Nico Revin wrote: Look at http://www.adobe.com/shockwave/download/alternates/ There's even Solaris on Sparc. Don't you find it unfair? I think it's not a big problem to port flash to freebsd. but it seems to me that soon flash will go opensource, as it is a modern trend to open the proprietary systems. That's the only explanation why there's flash for solaris but it's still none for bsd. Actually, a more probable explanation is simply that Sun -- as a monolithic economic power base in the form of a tech corporation -- has more influence with Adobe than what Adobe execs probably see (however inaccurately) as a fractious bunch of hobbyists. Opening up the source for the Flash player is the obvious choice, but it has been the obvious choice for a long time, and that hasn't swayed Adobe or Macromedia before it -- and the same can be said of the Adobe Acrobat viewer (except for the part about Macromedia). At this point, I'm not really prepared to make any predictions about whether either the Acrobat viewer or the Flash player will have its source opened in the foreseeable future. Adobe could go either way. -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed PDL: http://pdl.apotheon.org ] They always say that when life gives you lemons you should make lemonade. I always wonder -- isn't the lemonade going to suck if life doesn't give you any sugar? pgpvN2XEbYDFf.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Lack of Flash support is no longer acceptable. Bounty established...
On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 02:03:48PM +0200, Wilko Bulte wrote: Quoting Julian Stacey, who wrote on Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 01:58:12PM +0200 .. From: John Kozubik [EMAIL PROTECTED] I'm not trying to discount thier efforts, but Adobe makes an honest to god release version of flash for Linux, and FreeBSD runs linux binaries very honest to god != Binary Crap ! No flash on my machines without public source, checkable for security. (Unless maybe run in a jail/chroot) That is your view, others could very well be more pragmatic. I would rather have the choice to have a *full working* binary-only Flash than what we have now. While I completely sympathize with the desire for open source Flash support, and the desire to avoid binary-only Flash players, I also understand that sometimes the need for consistent, reliable Flash support must regrettably eclipse the desire for open source security vetting. Most people don't really *need* Flash support -- but once in a while, someone really *does* need that support to be able to achieve his or her business needs (for instance). I appreciate that we would strongly prefer public source access, but I doubt that will ever happen for Flash. I guess you also have not inspected the full source of (say) OO for security flaws ;-) That's a spurious argument at best. One doesn't have to personally inspect all the source code of something to enjoy the security benefits of the open source development model. Either you're intentionally playing dumb to ridicule someone's desire for greater security benefits in his software choices, or you need to educate yourself: http://techrepublic.com.com/5100-10877-6064734.html -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed PDL: http://pdl.apotheon.org ] Dennis Miller: Bill Gates is a monocle and a Persian Cat away from being the villain in a James Bond movie. pgpdCKt4dcOcp.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Lack of Flash support is no longer acceptable. Bounty established...
Hi, The sake of completeness, I think it's worth mentionning that when using nspluginwrapper, it is theorically possible to run the Flash plugin (and other ones too) inside QEMU. This is possible but slow and I used a very old version of QEMU. IIRC, the OpenSUSE wiki mentions how to do that with a more recent version of QEMU. However, if you run on i386, you don't need QEMU, simply use nspluginwrapper as is. I use FreeBSD 6.1 and tested FlashPlayer 9 lately, it works. Though not in a browser yet but with a standalone plugins viewer I wrote for testing and another project. I don't mean it won't work in a browser, I only mean I haven't got time to fully test with Firefox on *BSD yet. You can get trunk, which represents the upcoming nspluginwrapper 1.2.0, through: $ svn co http://svn.beauchesne.info/svn/gwenole/projects/nspluginwrapper/trunk nspluginwrapper nspluginwrapper 1.0.0 (targetted to be released this weekend) is available in a separate branch: $ svn co http://svn.beauchesne.info/svn/gwenole/projects/nspluginwrapper/branches/nspluginwrapper-1.0-branch I have not written docs for the standalone player yet (npplayer) but its usage is rather simple: npplayer src=uri/to/flash/content.swf npplayer can be useful to you so that to test whether your problems are related to your Linux emulator or the browser, or even nspluginwrapper. BTW, I would appreciate if people could test nspluginwrapper 1.0 on recent FreeBSD versions before I release it since I only have FreeBSD 6.1 and FreeBSD 5.3 at home. Thanks. Regards, Gwenole Beauchesne. ___ freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-advocacy To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Lack of Flash support is no longer acceptable. Bounty established...
On Fri, 20 Jun 2008, Scott T. Hildreth wrote: On Fri, 2008-06-20 at 08:39 +0200, Alexander Leidinger wrote: Quoting John Kozubik [EMAIL PROTECTED] (from Thu, 19 Jun 2008 14:38:11 -0700 (PDT)): First, a bounty has been posted here: http://blog.kozubik.com/john_kozubik/2007/12/bounty-posted-f.html Maybe the bounty would be better spent here, This was from an email on the gnome list from Joe Marcus Clarke [EMAIL PROTECTED] As to the point about Flash, Kris also mentioned that he has the ear of someone at Adobe who was hinting that a capable developer willing to sign an NDA could be given code to work on a native Flash plug-in port. This could bode well for PC-BSD and FreeBSD should someone step up to do this work. Perfect. This is exactly what the bounty: http://blog.kozubik.com/john_kozubik/2007/12/bounty-posted-f.html is for. I suggest that if you think this is important (as I do) to post a commitment to the bounty, and presumably someone will step forward to speak with Kris, sign an NDA, and get the FreeBSD desktop back to a reasonable level of utility. ___ freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-advocacy To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Lack of Flash support is no longer acceptable. Bounty established...
On Tue, 2008-06-24 at 08:41 -0700, John Kozubik wrote: On Fri, 20 Jun 2008, Scott T. Hildreth wrote: On Fri, 2008-06-20 at 08:39 +0200, Alexander Leidinger wrote: Quoting John Kozubik [EMAIL PROTECTED] (from Thu, 19 Jun 2008 14:38:11 -0700 (PDT)): First, a bounty has been posted here: http://blog.kozubik.com/john_kozubik/2007/12/bounty-posted-f.html Maybe the bounty would be better spent here, This was from an email on the gnome list from Joe Marcus Clarke [EMAIL PROTECTED] As to the point about Flash, Kris also mentioned that he has the ear of someone at Adobe who was hinting that a capable developer willing to sign an NDA could be given code to work on a native Flash plug-in port. This could bode well for PC-BSD and FreeBSD should someone step up to do this work. Perfect. This is exactly what the bounty: http://blog.kozubik.com/john_kozubik/2007/12/bounty-posted-f.html is for. I suggest that if you think this is important (as I do) to post a commitment to the bounty, and presumably someone will step forward to speak with Kris, sign an NDA, and get the FreeBSD desktop back to a reasonable level of utility. I wonder how much of a task it would be? Does anyone have any idea what language the clients are written in? ___ freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-advocacy To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Lack of Flash support is no longer acceptable. Bounty established...
On 6/19/08, John Kozubik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Don't shoot the messenger: FreeBSD is not useful as a desktop environment without the ability to support Flash in a stable, well-performing fashion. Running IE in Wine is not a solution. Running another OS in vmware to simply browse the web is not a solution. Free flash alternatives and flash movie players, etc., are, unfortunately, not a solution. ports/linux-flashplayer9 _is_ a solution, however it (currently) fails badly. Solution: First, a bounty has been posted here: http://blog.kozubik.com/john_kozubik/2007/12/bounty-posted-f.html We aren't even asking for new code, per se - anyone merely posting a recipe that allows linux-flashplayer9 to run, without crashing and with reasonable performance, with a generic browser (opera, firefox, konqueror) can claim the bounty. In fact, a recipe that is entirely inside the Linux Binary Compatibility layer would be just fine - running the linux version of a browser through binary compat is reasonable[1]. Second, I am calling on the FreeBSD Foundation to commit time and money to ensuring that flash functionality is recognized as a high priority for FreeBSD desktop use. I am willing to donate funds for this purpose. Flash 9 will not be the baseline forever, and it is inefficient to ramp up a grass roots bounty effort each time Adobe releases a new product. For this reason I believe it is reasonable for the project itself to ensure that Flash support is delivered and maintained in a timely fashion. [1] Since we're all probably already running Linux Binary Compat anyway... I've found wine + firefox + flash to work for everything I've tried so far (youtube, various websites with flash ads, one or two flash-only sites.) It did crash on me once, but I'm not sure it was related to flash. Wine is pretty good, but not perfect. If all you need is to visit flash sites, it's a decent workaround in the mean time. Also, I was very surprised how easy it was to set up (not having used wine before.) -Mark C. P.S. That's some ugly cross-posting you've started there... ___ freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-advocacy To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Lack of Flash support is no longer acceptable. Bounty established...
On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 8:55 AM, Scott T. Hildreth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, 2008-06-24 at 08:41 -0700, John Kozubik wrote: On Fri, 20 Jun 2008, Scott T. Hildreth wrote: On Fri, 2008-06-20 at 08:39 +0200, Alexander Leidinger wrote: Quoting John Kozubik [EMAIL PROTECTED] (from Thu, 19 Jun 2008 14:38:11 -0700 (PDT)): First, a bounty has been posted here: http://blog.kozubik.com/john_kozubik/2007/12/bounty-posted-f.html Maybe the bounty would be better spent here, This was from an email on the gnome list from Joe Marcus Clarke [EMAIL PROTECTED] As to the point about Flash, Kris also mentioned that he has the ear of someone at Adobe who was hinting that a capable developer willing to sign an NDA could be given code to work on a native Flash plug-in port. This could bode well for PC-BSD and FreeBSD should someone step up to do this work. Perfect. This is exactly what the bounty: http://blog.kozubik.com/john_kozubik/2007/12/bounty-posted-f.html is for. I suggest that if you think this is important (as I do) to post a commitment to the bounty, and presumably someone will step forward to speak with Kris, sign an NDA, and get the FreeBSD desktop back to a reasonable level of utility. I wonder how much of a task it would be? Does anyone have any idea what language the clients are written in? Look into Spidermonkey for more details: http://www.mozilla.org/js/spidermonkey/ It was designed to be the bridge between ActiveScript and Mozilla, allowing the Adobe folks to code Flash in terms of ActiveScript, instead of completely in C, thus making things more portable. I offered to work with the Mozilla group to get ActiveScript ported over to FreeBSD but I haven't received a reply in a year of having posted my bug report. (not designed to be troll-bait, just my personal opinion on the matter -- don't comment on it please) FWIW, Personally I don't think that Flash support is as critical as getting working x64 compatible OpenGL enabled video drivers, but then again my opinion differs from your's most likely. -Garrett ___ freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-advocacy To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Lack of Flash support is no longer acceptable. Bounty established...
Matt Olander wrote: I have been working with Adobe management and the Flash development team for quite some time. It seems, just as with the redistribution agreement we worked out with them, the legal department is most likely the hold up. I will have an update for the FreeBSD community within the next couple of months. In the meantime, just in case, it could be worthwhile to further our support of linux-flash9 under FreeBSD. Can we go whine at some Adobe address for this? Maybe when they see more individuals complaining, they will give this an higher priority? Kind regards, Tom ___ freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-advocacy To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Lack of Flash support is no longer acceptable. Bounty established...
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 John Kozubik wrote: | | Don't shoot the messenger: | | | FreeBSD is not useful as a desktop environment without the ability to | support Flash in a stable, well-performing fashion. gnash-devel provides flash 9 and works pretty well... | | | Running IE in Wine is not a solution. | | Running another OS in vmware to simply browse the web is not a solution. | | Free flash alternatives and flash movie players, etc., are, unfortunately, | not a solution. | | ports/linux-flashplayer9 _is_ a solution, however it (currently) fails | badly. | | | Solution: | | | First, a bounty has been posted here: | | http://blog.kozubik.com/john_kozubik/2007/12/bounty-posted-f.html | | We aren't even asking for new code, per se - anyone merely posting a | recipe that allows linux-flashplayer9 to run, without crashing and with | reasonable performance, with a generic browser (opera, firefox, konqueror) | can claim the bounty. In fact, a recipe that is entirely inside the Linux | Binary Compatibility layer would be just fine - running the linux version | of a browser through binary compat is reasonable[1]. | | Second, I am calling on the FreeBSD Foundation to commit time and money to | ensuring that flash functionality is recognized as a high priority for | FreeBSD desktop use. I am willing to donate funds for this purpose. | Flash 9 will not be the baseline forever, and it is inefficient to ramp up | a grass roots bounty effort each time Adobe releases a new product. For | this reason I believe it is reasonable for the project itself to ensure | that Flash support is delivered and maintained in a timely fashion. | | | | [1] Since we're all probably already running Linux Binary | Compat anyway... | | | - | John Kozubik - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.kozubik.com - -- Pietro Cerutti [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP Public Key: http://gahr.ch/pgp -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (FreeBSD) iEYEAREKAAYFAkha1zsACgkQwMJqmJVx9470WgCg4APA6m3khgf4iIsrNAXcPbM/ Pr4An10QgMMM/Oalne+GGUzO/wha1HaX =2CKx -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-advocacy To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Lack of Flash support is no longer acceptable. Bounty established...
On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 08:39:06AM +0200, Alexander Leidinger wrote: Quoting John Kozubik [EMAIL PROTECTED] (from Thu, 19 Jun 2008 14:38:11 -0700 (PDT)): First, a bounty has been posted here: http://blog.kozubik.com/john_kozubik/2007/12/bounty-posted-f.html From the site: ---snip--- I will pay $200 to whoever can compose a working and stable recipe for running Adobe Flash 9 inside of the FreeBSD native version of Opera 9 on FreeBSD 6.x. This shouldn't be that hard - in fact, there is already a linux-flashplugin9 port. ---snip--- Comments from other people with some more money not included here... And now the sad reality check: linux-flashplugin9 will _never_ work on 6.x (lack of linux 2.6 emulation, and this is not a MFC candidate). Getting it to work on 7.x is possible. All what you need is nspluginwrapper to get it running in the native firefox/opera/whatever, and someone who is willing to debug the linuxulator (on -current, as there is a more complete 2.6 compatibility there, and this can be MFCed to 7.x) and find the bug/problem which is causing the crashes. Whoever is willing to tackle this: head over to emulation@ (CCed) and ask what debugging possibilities we have in the linuxulator. I tried to debug the flash9 and failed badly. It might be that I overlooked something trivial but... the flash9 is a big binary-only monster and basically the only trace of what its doing you can get is a syscall-trace. Which is not that much useful. I didnt find any missing syscalls or something like that and the fail is a complete mystery for me otoh I looked at this a LOONG time ago. I might want to look at it again (after some other things settle) anyway... I dont think that flash9 crashes are related to 2.6 emulation in any way. iirc it runs (and crashes) on 2.4 as well. I remember it crashes in $the_thing_that_ff_uses_to_report_bugs which was some proprietary app which got replaced in ff3.0, you might want to check what happened. anyway - if someone wants to debug this, feel free to contact me, I am willing to help roman _ ___ freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-advocacy To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Lack of Flash support is no longer acceptable. Bounty established...
Quoting Roman Divacky [EMAIL PROTECTED] (from Fri, 20 Jun 2008 10:04:16 +0200): On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 08:39:06AM +0200, Alexander Leidinger wrote: Quoting John Kozubik [EMAIL PROTECTED] (from Thu, 19 Jun 2008 14:38:11 -0700 (PDT)): First, a bounty has been posted here: http://blog.kozubik.com/john_kozubik/2007/12/bounty-posted-f.html From the site: ---snip--- I will pay $200 to whoever can compose a working and stable recipe for running Adobe Flash 9 inside of the FreeBSD native version of Opera 9 on FreeBSD 6.x. This shouldn't be that hard - in fact, there is already a linux-flashplugin9 port. ---snip--- Comments from other people with some more money not included here... And now the sad reality check: linux-flashplugin9 will _never_ work on 6.x (lack of linux 2.6 emulation, and this is not a MFC candidate). Getting it to work on 7.x is possible. All what you need is nspluginwrapper to get it running in the native firefox/opera/whatever, and someone who is willing to debug the linuxulator (on -current, as there is a more complete 2.6 compatibility there, and this can be MFCed to 7.x) and find the bug/problem which is causing the crashes. Whoever is willing to tackle this: head over to emulation@ (CCed) and ask what debugging possibilities we have in the linuxulator. I tried to debug the flash9 and failed badly. It might be that I overlooked something trivial but... the flash9 is a big binary-only monster and basically the only trace of what its doing you can get is a syscall-trace. Which is not that much I think enabling the the linuxulator debug stuff and maybe adding some more printfs at some places can reveal some more stuff... with some in-deep reviewing of what happens. useful. I didnt find any missing syscalls or something like that and the fail is a complete mystery for me otoh I looked at this a LOONG time ago. Which is in indication that there are some (subtle) differences between the linuxulator and the real linux we have to track down. I might want to look at it again (after some other things settle) anyway... I dont think that flash9 crashes are related to 2.6 emulation in any way. iirc it runs (and crashes) on 2.4 as well. I remember it crashes in Hmmm... now I'm not sure anymore, but I thought we had reports that it runs better with 2.6... Bye, Alexander. -- I wish I was a sex-starved manicurist found dead in the Bronx!! http://www.Leidinger.netAlexander @ Leidinger.net: PGP ID = B0063FE7 http://www.FreeBSD.org netchild @ FreeBSD.org : PGP ID = 72077137 ___ freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-advocacy To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Lack of Flash support is no longer acceptable. Bounty established...
Quoting Julian Stacey, who wrote on Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 01:58:12PM +0200 .. From: John Kozubik [EMAIL PROTECTED] I'm not trying to discount thier efforts, but Adobe makes an honest to god release version of flash for Linux, and FreeBSD runs linux binaries very honest to god != Binary Crap ! No flash on my machines without public source, checkable for security. (Unless maybe run in a jail/chroot) That is your view, others could very well be more pragmatic. I would rather have the choice to have a *full working* binary-only Flash than what we have now. I appreciate that we would strongly prefer public source access, but I doubt that will ever happen for Flash. I guess you also have not inspected the full source of (say) OO for security flaws ;-) Wilko Julian -- Julian Stacey: BSDUnixLinux C Prog Admin SysEng Consult Munich www.berklix.com Mail just Ascii plain text. HTML Base64 text are spam. ___ freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-advocacy To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- end of quoted text --- -- Wilko Bulte [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-advocacy To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Lack of Flash support is no longer acceptable. Bounty established...
Wilko Bulte wrote: Quoting Julian Stacey, who wrote on Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 01:58:12PM +0200 .. From: John Kozubik [EMAIL PROTECTED] I'm not trying to discount thier efforts, but Adobe makes an honest to god release version of flash for Linux, and FreeBSD runs linux binaries very honest to god != Binary Crap ! No flash on my machines without public source, checkable for security. (Unless maybe run in a jail/chroot) That is your view, others could very well be more pragmatic. I would rather have the choice to have a *full working* binary-only Flash than what we have now. Agreed. Free choice for all. Personaly Flash is too much of a PITA for me with all its problems, ever changing solutions on versions tools archs eg amd64, risks. I appreciate that we would strongly prefer public source access, but I doubt that will ever happen for Flash. Could well be. Similar reasons I totaly avoid Micro$oft, whereas some use wine or native MS. I guess you also have not inspected the full source of (say) OO for security flaws ;-) True, I only read sources to tweak code or where manuals are bad. But fact of sources being public must discourage much evil minded coding hiding in plain view ready for dicovery, where alerts will follow. Julian -- Julian Stacey: BSDUnixLinux C Prog Admin SysEng Consult Munich www.berklix.com Mail just Ascii plain text. HTML Base64 text are spam. ___ freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-advocacy To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Lack of Flash support is no longer acceptable. Bounty established...
Quoting Julian Stacey, who wrote on Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 02:27:58PM +0200 .. Wilko Bulte wrote: Quoting Julian Stacey, who wrote on Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 01:58:12PM +0200 .. From: John Kozubik [EMAIL PROTECTED] I'm not trying to discount thier efforts, but Adobe makes an honest to god release version of flash for Linux, and FreeBSD runs linux binaries very honest to god != Binary Crap ! No flash on my machines without public source, checkable for security. (Unless maybe run in a jail/chroot) That is your view, others could very well be more pragmatic. I would rather have the choice to have a *full working* binary-only Flash than what we have now. Agreed. Free choice for all. Personaly Flash is too much of a PITA for me with all its problems, ever changing solutions on versions tools archs eg amd64, risks. And that is not even considering the total disaster it is for people with a visual handicap.. True, I only read sources to tweak code or where manuals are bad. But fact of sources being public must discourage much evil minded coding hiding in plain view ready for dicovery, where alerts will follow. Yes, you are right of course. It is good we continue to have goal to work towards 8-) take care, Wilko -- Wilko Bulte [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-advocacy To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Lack of Flash support is no longer acceptable. Bounty established...
On Jun 19, 2008, at 3:57 PM, John Kozubik wrote: On Fri, 20 Jun 2008, Pietro Cerutti wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 John Kozubik wrote: | | Don't shoot the messenger: | | | FreeBSD is not useful as a desktop environment without the ability to | support Flash in a stable, well-performing fashion. gnash-devel provides flash 9 and works pretty well... That's why I discounted that as a solution. I am a FreeBSD desktop user, not a FreeBSD desktop developer. I, and many others, do not have time to hack around with gnash working pretty well. I have been working with Adobe management and the Flash development team for quite some time. It seems, just as with the redistribution agreement we worked out with them, the legal department is most likely the hold up. I will have an update for the FreeBSD community within the next couple of months. In the meantime, just in case, it could be worthwhile to further our support of linux-flash9 under FreeBSD. best, -matt -- Matt Olander CTO, iXsystems - Servers for Open Source http://www.iXsystems.com Public Relations, The FreeBSD Project http://www.FreeBSD.org BSD on the Desktop! http://www.pcbsd.org Phone: (408)943-4100 ext. 113Fax: (408)943-4101 ___ freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-advocacy To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Lack of Flash support is no longer acceptable. Bounty established...
Matt, On Thu, 19 Jun 2008, Matt Olander wrote: I have been working with Adobe management and the Flash development team for quite some time. It seems, just as with the redistribution agreement we worked out with them, the legal department is most likely the hold up. I will have an update for the FreeBSD community within the next couple of months. In the meantime, just in case, it could be worthwhile to further our support of linux-flash9 under FreeBSD. Thank you very much for your work, and for this information - this is great news. I agree that we should move forward with linux-flash9 under FreeBSD, just in case. Do you have any insight into why that solution is unworkable currently ? Who, if anyone, is working on that ? Out of curiousity, which flash player do you use in FreeBSD, and what is your recipe for making it work ? Thank you. ___ freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-advocacy To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
