Firefox 4 repo

JD jd1008 at gmail.com
Mon Jul 19 05:48:49 UTC 2010


  On 07/18/2010 09:41 PM, Suvayu Ali wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sunday 18 July 2010 09:13 PM, JD wrote:
>>     On 07/18/2010 08:56 PM, David wrote:
>>> On 7/18/2010 11:44 PM, JD wrote:
>>>>      On 07/18/2010 08:22 PM, David wrote:
>>>>> On 7/18/2010 11:00 PM, Suvayu Ali wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Firefox looks for plugins in /firefox/plugins. Which is where ever you
>>>>> put it.  Perhaps   /home/<user_name>/firefox/plugins?
>>>> Not so.
>>>> My flash plugin is in
>>>> $ ls -l /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins/libflashplayer.so
>>>> lrwxrwxrwx 1 skroot root 39 Jun 25 12:36
>>>> /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins/libflashplayer.so ->
>>>> /usr/lib/flash-plugin/libflashplayer.so
>>>>
>>>> Firefox does not search /usr/lib/flash-plugin/
>>>> It searches /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins
>>>>
>>>> However, you are free to put the plugins in your home dir path, such as
>>>>
>>>> ~/.mozilla/firefox/plugins/
>>>> or
>>>> ~/.mozilla/firefox/your-profile-name/plugins
>>> The Firefox that this person wants to use is the package from Mozilla
>>> not the package from Fedora. The package that Fedora provides looks in
>>> /usr/lib mozilla/plugins, as you wrote, and also in
>>> /usr/lib64/mozilla/plugins on 64 bit systems.
>> Not 100% correct.
>> I AM using the vanilla binary tarball from mozilla.com
>> and not the fedora distributed rpm.
>> So, I am not having any issues with any of my plugins
>> in /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins. The mozilla.com's FF binary has
>> no trouble finding the plugins.
>>> Mozilla says to use /firefox/plugins. Would using Fedora's directories
>>> work? Maybe. I don't know because I just followed Mozilla's directions,
>>> it is their program after all, and have had no problems over the years.
>> You know, some of those "directions" are
>> probably ancient and have not been updated,
>> ans so, they have kept the code in FF to also search
>> /firefox/plugins.
>> Also, how come the vanilla binary from mozilla.com
>> does not create /firefox/plugins when you untar the
>> tarball as root?
>> I have never used /firefox/plugins
>> I have no plugins in my home directory.
>>
> These are the installed plugins on my system.
>
> $ lt ~/.mozilla/plugins/
> total 8.0K
> drwx------. 2 jallad jallad 4.0K May 28 10:15 moonlight
> drwxrwxr-x. 2 jallad jallad 4.0K May 28 10:15 QuakeLive
> $ lt /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins/
> total 0
> $ lt /usr/lib64/mozilla/plugins/
> total 9.6M
> -rwxr-xr-x. 1 root root  90K May 18 09:15 gecko-mediaplayer-qt.so
> -rwxr-xr-x. 1 root root  90K May 18 09:15 gecko-mediaplayer-wmp.so
> -rwxr-xr-x. 1 root root  89K May 18 09:15 gecko-mediaplayer-rm.so
> -rwxr-xr-x. 1 root root  89K May 18 09:15 gecko-mediaplayer-dvx.so
> -rwxr-xr-x. 1 root root  91K May 18 09:15 gecko-mediaplayer.so
> -rwxr-xr-x. 1 root root 9.2M May 29 14:19
> .so
> -rwxr-xr-x. 1 root root 5.2K Jun  1 07:30
> librhythmbox-itms-detection-plugin.so
> lrwxrwxrwx. 1 root root   41 Jun 16 10:26 libjavaplugin.so ->
> /etc/alternatives/libjavaplugin.so.x86_64
>
> In firefox I see the moonlight and QuaLive plugins disabled since they
> are not compatible with FF4.0b. However they are not listed under
> plugins, instead they show up as disabled extensions. And none of my
> system-wide plugins are available to me. My about:plugins page is
> completely empty!
Strange. Only actual extensions that show up as
disabled for me are forecastfox and requestpolicy.
> Hope this describes my situation clearly.
>
I ran on FC7-64 bit for a couple of years until I got
sick of the issue of plugins, most of which were
for 32  bit architectures. Wrappers were a hassle
and did not always work with all plugins.
So, I switched to 32  bit, and all has been well
as far as plugins are concerned.

So, you must have installed the 64 bit tarball (per link I saw in an 
earlier post), right?
Well, you can still install the 32  bit flash plugins from Adobe, but 
you will have to also
install flash plugin wrapper.


More information about the users mailing list