Adobe (Temporarily?) Kills 64-Bit Flash For Linux
steveu at coppice.org
Mon Jun 14 15:37:55 UTC 2010
On 06/14/2010 11:20 PM, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> --- On Mon, 6/14/10, Steve Underwood<steveu at coppice.org> wrote:
>> On 06/14/2010 12:54 PM, Patrick
>> Bartek wrote:
>>> --- On Sun, 6/13/10, Bill Davidsen<davidsen at tmr.com>
>>>> That isn't going to make people very
>>> Guess I'll just continue to use 10.0 R45 Beta 64-bit
>> like I have been since February when it was released.
>> I works well enough for me. Yes, it crashes sometimes,
>> but not often. In fact, since I cleaned Totem (and its
>> related/unneeded dependencies) off my system--first with F9
>> and then with F12--in favor of mplayer, I've had a lot less
>> video streaming/playing problems.
>>> However, I still have that
>> Hulu-won't-play-with-64bit-Flash problem, except by using
>> their 64-bit desktop player.
>> This might be OK if they hadn't admitted that the version
>> you are
>> running has some huge security hole.
> I thought 10.1 was the one with the problem. In any case, I don't think the "hole" will cause much problems with Linux based systems. When you read of the panic attacks people are having, it's usually about Windows systems.
I believe 10.1 is supposed to be the "big fix" for problems in
10.0.<something>. They wouldn't have release 10.1 last Friday if it was
supposed to have the serious fault they reported a few days before,
would they? You cut the part of my message where I said 10.1 on a 32 bit
machine appears to be causing kernel faults. If it can do that, who know
what nasty things it could do if its insecure.
More information about the users