On Sun, Oct 20, 2002 at 04:35:31PM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote: > > > I will keep waiting for flashutils upstream's response, > > but i realy suggest looking at tubesock for flash > > playing or any feedback you have in mind. > > Just as a data point, I was never able to get flashplugin working on any > platform other than i386 (tried alpha and powerpc), so I'm not sure how > much of a win it would be if flashplugin did make it into the archive.
and flashplayer, does it work on alpha and powerpc? > I'm not sure what you mean by a GPL violation (I thought the problem > with flashplugin was a dependency on a header we have no right to > redistribute), flashplugin includes a header from the mozilla sources that is licensed under the MPL only, but GPL code cannot be linked with non-GPL code. > but it appears that tubesock is also GPL. If there > really is a GPL violation involved in packaging flashplugin, wouldn't > tubesock have the same problem? only if tubesock includes the same header. that header is meant as a "sample" for plugin authoring, but it's not necessary for building a plugin. > BTW, I think browser integration is a key requirement for any flash > player -- at least, all flash content I'm interested in is on the web. > If no plugin is available today, is there any possibility of providing > hooks for integration with plugger, for example? what do you mean with that? the plugin issue is being worked on, if you want to help have a look at this message: http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_id=869514&forum_id=9582 cheers, -- Robert Millan "5 years from now everyone will be running free GNU on their 200 MIPS, 64M SPARCstation-5" Andrew S. Tanenbaum, 30 Jan 1992
