Re: macromedia flash plugin for firefox?
Ron Johnson wrote:
On Sun, 2006-04-02 at 12:10 +0100, Doofus wrote:
Sridhar M.A. wrote:
Not at all the answer I wanted but still much appreciated. After
removing "flashplugin-nonfree", which conflicted, that works perfectly.
On Sun, Apr 02, 2006 at 11:20:05AM +0100, Doofus wrote:
> >I've downloaded "install_flash_player_7_linux.tar.gz" from
> >macromedia.com, installed Takuo's "flashplugin-nonfree" package with
> >dependecies (ruby, debconf), then ran the "update-flashplugin" script.
> >All as root.
> >The firefox browser reports "No plug-ins are installed".
> Sorry I didn't finish properly.
> I'm running sarge. The during installation aptitude and
> update-flashplugin report:
> Setting up flashplugin-nonfree (7.0.25-5) ...
> I: checking http://macromedis.rediris.es/tarball/debian/ ...
> No new version is detected. ( = Not installed)
> And the actual plugin file isn't on the machine anywhere.
> I'm mystified because I got this working fine a couple of weeks ago on a
> similar machine.
> Can anyone please advise?
Not exactly an answer, but why don't you install
flashplayer-mozilla_18.104.22.168-0.1_i386.deb from ftp.nerim.net. That sets
up things correctly.
I'd love to understand why the debian system method doesn't work though.
Clearly it'd be nicer to have a script you can run occasionally that
checks for and installs updated plugins with little interaction. The
output message above from the update-flashplugin script suggests it's
decided there's already a flash player installed, but this is a newly
built machine with virtually nothing done to it yet except a newly built
kernel, X and WindowMaker.
Put this in your sources.list:
deb ftp://ftp.nerim.net/debian-marillat/ sid main
Adjust for sid or testing as to your system needs.
# apt-get install flashplugin-nonfree
You'll get flashplugin-nonfree 22.214.171.124 that works perfectly.
That's what I'm running now, but I pulled the deb package down and
installed it manually. I run sarge stable, and am nervous about adding
third party testing or unstable entries to my sources list. Is this even
Both you and Mr Sridhar have suggested exactly the same thing, which
implies to me that the sarge flashplugin-nonfree package is known to be
faulty - is that the case?
Thanks for your help.