Re: Gnash

On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 13:10 -0400, John L. Cunningham wrote: > On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 05:10:24PM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > > Camaleón mentioned Flash in another thread, so I remembered that I > > didn't test Gnash for a long time. Does anybody use latest version of >

Re: Gnash

On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 05:10:24PM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > Camaleón mentioned Flash in another thread, so I remembered that I > didn't test Gnash for a long time. Does anybody use latest version of > Gnash and can report some experiences? Last time I tried Gnash it didn't

Gnash

Camaleón mentioned Flash in another thread, so I remembered that I didn't test Gnash for a long time. Does anybody use latest version of Gnash and can report some experiences? Last time I tried Gnash it didn't work for my needs. I guess I'll remove Flash and test Gnash withi

Re: No sound from Gnash in Iceweasel or Epiphany or from VLC

On Sat, 07 Apr 2012 14:19:15 -0400, Kevin Williams wrote: (please, turn off html, thanks...) > The video works just fine in both applications, but it has no sound. > However, I can play ogv videos with sound just fine from Gnome Sound > Recorder and Totem Movie Player. > > My preferred sound

Re: No sound from Gnash in Iceweasel or Epiphany or from VLC

ms which have no card 0 or on which card > 0 is broken. > > The quickest way to check if this is your problem is to unplug the USB > headset and then run as root: > > modprobe -r snd_usb_audio > modprobe snd_usb_audio index=0 > > Then plug in the headset again, verify that it

Re: No sound from Gnash in Iceweasel or Epiphany or from VLC

our problem is to unplug the USB headset and then run as root: modprobe -r snd_usb_audio modprobe snd_usb_audio index=0 Then plug in the headset again, verify that it is card 0 now (cat /proc/asound/cards should show " 0 [DSP ]: USB-Audio ...") and try if Gnash and VLC work. -- Reg

No sound from Gnash in Iceweasel or Epiphany or from VLC

Hi, The video works just fine in both applications, but it has no sound. However, I can play ogv videos with sound just fine from Gnome Sound Recorder and Totem Movie Player. My preferred sound device is a Plantronics .Audio 646 DSP usb headset. I have also tried plugging in a set of Apple e

Re: Upgraded from Squeeze to unstable - Installing gnash

Bob Proulx wrote: > Csanyi Pal wrote: > > sudo aptitude install gnash > > > > The following NEW packages will be installed: > > gnash gnash-common{ab} > > ... > > The following packages have unmet dependencies: > > gnash-common: Depends: libavcode

Re: Upgraded from Squeeze to unstable - Installing gnash

Csanyi Pal wrote: > sudo aptitude install gnash > > The following NEW packages will be installed: > gnash gnash-common{ab} > ... > The following packages have unmet dependencies: > gnash-common: Depends: libavcodec52 (>= 4:0.6-1~) which is a virtual But Squeeze&#

Re: Upgraded from Squeeze to unstable - Installing gnash

Hi, After resolving sudo issue I want to install gnash but get these output: sudo aptitude install gnash The following NEW packages will be installed: gnash gnash-common{ab} The following packages are RECOMMENDED but will NOT be installed: gstreamer0.10-ffmpeg gstreamer0.10-fluendo-mp3 0

Re: Gnash killing my CPU

On Thu, 17 Feb 2011 15:24:04 -0600, Noah Duffy wrote: > On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 10:15 AM, Camaleón wrote: >> JFYI, there is no need to remove the package, gnash can co-exist with >> Adobe's flash player plugin. In fact, I keep both of them installed so >> in the event o

Re: Gnash killing my CPU

ystem monitor and one of my processors was was 100% with the > other not to far behind.  I check the processes: Gnash is at 100%.  I > killed it and probably will uninstall it because I need to run Flash > for certain sites, but I'm still curious if anyone else has this > problem with G

Re: Gnash killing my CPU

cessors was was 100% with the other not to far behind. I check the processes: Gnash is at 100%. I killed it and probably will uninstall it because I need to run Flash for certain sites, but I'm still curious if anyone else has this problem with Gnash. Noah Duffy Skype - Noah0504 | Jabber/Goo

Re: Gnash killing my CPU

On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 10:15 AM, Camaleón wrote: > On Wed, 16 Feb 2011 22:49:02 -0600, Noah Duffy wrote: > > (...) > >> I killed it and >> probably will uninstall it because I need to run Flash for certain >> sites, but I'm still curious if anyone else ha

Re: Gnash killing my CPU

On Wed, 16 Feb 2011 22:49:02 -0600, Noah Duffy wrote: (...) > I killed it and > probably will uninstall it because I need to run Flash for certain > sites, but I'm still curious if anyone else has this problem with Gnash. JFYI, there is no need to remove the package, gnash can

Re: Gnash killing my CPU

the system monitor and one of my processors was was 100% with the > other not to far behind. I check the processes: Gnash is at 100%. I > killed it and probably will uninstall it because I need to run Flash > for certain sites, but I'm still curious if anyone else has this > proble

Gnash killing my CPU

t to far behind. I check the processes: Gnash is at 100%. I killed it and probably will uninstall it because I need to run Flash for certain sites, but I'm still curious if anyone else has this problem with Gnash. Noah Duffy Skype - Noah0504 | Jabber/Google Talk - n.milo.du...@gmail.com -- T

Re: dumb question about gnash youtube-dl and watching youtube videos...

On 2010-12-29 14:01:31 +, Michael Fothergill wrote: > I installed clive and then tried this: > > ismi...@spc2-burn4-0-0-cust110:~$ clive > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FwDYbNIHyN0 > > clive 0.4.18 20080715 [Linux] > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FwDYbNIHyN0&fmt=18 >

Re: dumb question about gnash youtube-dl and watching youtube videos...

> > http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/flashplayer10/releasenotes_64bit.html > > 'We have closed the Flash Player 10 for 64-bit Linux program on Adobe > Labs and have made Flash Player "Square" available.' > > > http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/flashplayer10/square/ > > 'Developers and users test

Re: dumb question about gnash youtube-dl and watching youtube videos...

Michael Fothergill: > > > On Wed, 22 Dec 2010 19:51:08 +, Michael Fothergill wrote: > > > > I tried getting flashplayer-nonfree to work with youtube but it > > > > didn't quite succeed. > > > > > > Flashplayer-nonfree 9 is known to have some glitches, but 10.2 > > > beta, downloadable from > >

Re: dumb question about gnash youtube-dl and watching youtube videos...

>> Op Wed, 22 Dec 2010 19:51:08 +, Michael Fothergill wrote: >>> I tried getting flashplayer-nonfree to work with youtube but it didn't >>> quite succeed. >> >> Flashplayer-nonfree 9 is known to have some glitches, but 10.2 beta, >> downloadable from http://labs.adobe.com/downloads/flashplayer1

Re: dumb question about gnash youtube-dl and watching youtube videos...

> > Try this easy recipe: > >    clive http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FwDYbNIHyN0 >    [wait for arrival] >    mplayer youtube_FwDYbNIHyN0.flv I installed clive and then tried this: > > I use "cclive" for this purpose, and it works. However, "cclive" > ismi...@spc2-burn4-0-0-cust110:~$ clive

Re: dumb question about gnash youtube-dl and watching youtube videos...

Phil Requirements wrote: On 2010-12-24 10:23:18 -0600, Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote: Celejar wrote: Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote: Celejar wrote: Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote: Celejar wrote: Phil Requirements wrote: On 2010-12-23 09:09:56 -0600, Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote: /Thu Dec 23-09:05:15# mplayer E6ROSTqm2

Re: dumb question about gnash youtube-dl and watching youtube videos...

On 2010-12-24 10:23:18 -0600, Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote: > Celejar wrote: > >Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote: > >>Celejar wrote: > >>>Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote: > Celejar wrote: > >Phil Requirements wrote: > >>On 2010-12-23 09:09:56 -0600, Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote: > >>>/Thu Dec 23-09:05:15# mplayer

Re: dumb question about gnash youtube-dl and watching youtube videos...

Celejar wrote: On Thu, 23 Dec 2010 14:58:22 -0600 Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote: Celejar wrote: On Thu, 23 Dec 2010 14:11:11 -0600 Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote: Celejar wrote: On Thu, 23 Dec 2010 18:25:16 + Phil Requirements wrote: On 2010-12-23 09:09:56 -0600, Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote: /Thu Dec 23

Re: dumb question about gnash youtube-dl and watching youtube videos...

On Thu, 23 Dec 2010 14:58:22 -0600 Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote: > Celejar wrote: > > On Thu, 23 Dec 2010 14:11:11 -0600 > > Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote: > > > >> Celejar wrote: > >>> On Thu, 23 Dec 2010 18:25:16 + > >>> Phil Requirements wrote: > >>> > On 2010-12-23 09:09:56 -0600, Hugo Vanwoerko

Re: dumb question about gnash youtube-dl and watching youtube videos...

Celejar wrote: On Thu, 23 Dec 2010 14:11:11 -0600 Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote: Celejar wrote: On Thu, 23 Dec 2010 18:25:16 + Phil Requirements wrote: On 2010-12-23 09:09:56 -0600, Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote: /Thu Dec 23-09:05:15# mplayer E6ROSTqm2KQ.flv (snip) Playing E6ROSTqm2KQ.flv. TiVo file

Re: dumb question about gnash youtube-dl and watching youtube videos...

On Thu, 23 Dec 2010 14:11:11 -0600 Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote: > Celejar wrote: > > On Thu, 23 Dec 2010 18:25:16 + > > Phil Requirements wrote: > > > >> On 2010-12-23 09:09:56 -0600, Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote: > >>> /Thu Dec 23-09:05:15# mplayer E6ROSTqm2KQ.flv > >>> (snip) > >>> Playing E6ROSTqm2KQ

Re: dumb question about gnash youtube-dl and watching youtube videos...

Celejar wrote: On Thu, 23 Dec 2010 18:25:16 + Phil Requirements wrote: On 2010-12-23 09:09:56 -0600, Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote: /Thu Dec 23-09:05:15# mplayer E6ROSTqm2KQ.flv (snip) Playing E6ROSTqm2KQ.flv. TiVo file format detected. MPEG: No audio stream found -> no sound. MPEG: FATAL: EOF wh

Re: dumb question about gnash youtube-dl and watching youtube videos...

On Thu, 23 Dec 2010 18:25:16 + Phil Requirements wrote: > On 2010-12-23 09:09:56 -0600, Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote: > > > > /Thu Dec 23-09:05:15# mplayer E6ROSTqm2KQ.flv > > (snip) > > Playing E6ROSTqm2KQ.flv. > > TiVo file format detected. > > MPEG: No audio stream found -> no sound. > > MPEG: F

Re: dumb question about gnash youtube-dl and watching youtube videos...

Phil Requirements wrote: On 2010-12-23 09:09:56 -0600, Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote: /Thu Dec 23-09:05:15# mplayer E6ROSTqm2KQ.flv (snip) Playing E6ROSTqm2KQ.flv. TiVo file format detected. MPEG: No audio stream found -> no sound. MPEG: FATAL: EOF while searching for sequence header. Video: Cannot read

Re: dumb question about gnash youtube-dl and watching youtube videos...

On 2010-12-23 09:09:56 -0600, Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote: > > /Thu Dec 23-09:05:15# mplayer E6ROSTqm2KQ.flv > (snip) > Playing E6ROSTqm2KQ.flv. > TiVo file format detected. > MPEG: No audio stream found -> no sound. > MPEG: FATAL: EOF while searching for sequence header. > Video: Cannot read properties

Re: dumb question about gnash youtube-dl and watching youtube videos...

Michael Fothergill wrote: Dear Debian folks, I tried getting flashplayer-nonfree to work with youtube but it didn't quite succeed. So I then read some web pages that said gnash could read swf files and so you in theory download a youtube video and then watch it using gnash. I

Re: dumb question about gnash youtube-dl and watching youtube videos...

Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote: Celejar wrote: On Wed, 22 Dec 2010 19:51:08 + Michael Fothergill wrote: Dear Debian folks, I tried getting flashplayer-nonfree to work with youtube but it didn't quite succeed. So I then read some web pages that said gnash could read swf files and so y

Re: dumb question about gnash youtube-dl and watching youtube videos...

Celejar wrote: On Wed, 22 Dec 2010 19:51:08 + Michael Fothergill wrote: Dear Debian folks, I tried getting flashplayer-nonfree to work with youtube but it didn't quite succeed. So I then read some web pages that said gnash could read swf files and so you in theory download a yo

Re: dumb question about gnash youtube-dl and watching youtube videos...

gnash at. Looks like youtube-dl would do this. Try this easy recipe: clive http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FwDYbNIHyN0 [wait for arrival] mplayer youtube_FwDYbNIHyN0.flv I use "cclive" for this purpose, and it works. However, "cclive" is not avaialable in L

Re: dumb question about gnash youtube-dl and watching youtube videos...

nterested in pointing > gnash at. > > Looks like youtube-dl would do this. > Try this easy recipe: clive http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FwDYbNIHyN0 [wait for arrival] mplayer youtube_FwDYbNIHyN0.flv I use "cclive" for this purpose, and it works. However, &quo

Re: dumb question about gnash youtube-dl and watching youtube videos...

On Wed, 22 Dec 2010 21:47:38 +0100, Sjoerd Hiemstra wrote: > Op Wed, 22 Dec 2010 19:51:08 +, Michael Fothergill wrote: >> I tried getting flashplayer-nonfree to work with youtube but it didn't >> quite succeed. > > Flashplayer-nonfree 9 is known to have some glitches, but 10.2 beta, > downloa

Re: dumb question about gnash youtube-dl and watching youtube videos...

On Wed, 22 Dec 2010 19:51:08 + Michael Fothergill wrote: > Dear Debian folks, > > I tried getting flashplayer-nonfree to work with youtube but it didn't > quite succeed. So I then read some web pages that said gnash could > read swf files and so you in theory download

Re: dumb question about gnash youtube-dl and watching youtube videos...

Op Wed, 22 Dec 2010 19:51:08 +, Michael Fothergill wrote: > I tried getting flashplayer-nonfree to work with youtube but it didn't > quite succeed. Flashplayer-nonfree 9 is known to have some glitches, but 10.2 beta, downloadable from http://labs.adobe.com/downloads/flashplayer10.html appears

Re: dumb question about gnash youtube-dl and watching youtube videos...

On 12/22/2010 01:51 PM, Michael Fothergill wrote: Dear Debian folks, ... Doing something like this: gnash -u http://example.domain.com/flashfile.swf or flashfile.flv etc ... Looks like youtube-dl would do this. It does, but it is not available pre-packaged in Lenny. You can get youtube

dumb question about gnash youtube-dl and watching youtube videos...

Dear Debian folks, I tried getting flashplayer-nonfree to work with youtube but it didn't quite succeed. So I then read some web pages that said gnash could read swf files and so you in theory download a youtube video and then watch it using gnash. I found youtube-dl but then notic

Re: Why does installing gnome packages versioned 2.28+6 insist on installing gnash?

Am 17.03.2010 09:05, schrieb Mark Allums: > Gnash is a noble effort. Gnash sucks. I want choice, and my choice is > Adobe Flash. Installing Gnash screws up Flash. Right now, I can refuse > to update GNOME on Squeeze any further, but the time will come when that > will not be a v

Re: [semi-SOLVED] Re: Why does installing gnome packages versioned 2.28+6 insist on installing gnash?

On Sun, 21 Mar 2010 12:37:38 +0100 Vincent Lefevre wrote: > On 2010-03-20 21:57:24 -0400, Celejar wrote: > > Well, a quick search seems to indicate that some DEs already have this, > > e.g. Gnome, with its /etc/gnome/defaults.lst. I guess you want > > something that's DE independent. > > But ev

Re: gnash vs. flash

On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 00:58:28 +0200 Dotan Cohen wrote: > I understand that English is the only language in which two > negatively-oriented words do not make a positive I don't not understand that; they can. ;-} > , but two > positively-oriented words do make a negative. Cybe R. Wizard -- Re

Re: gnash vs. flash

> No. > > zeal: positive connotations. > zealot: negative connotations. > Thanks. I needed that confirmation. > English is tricky that way. > I understand that English is the only language in which two negatively-oriented words do not make a positive, but two positively-oriented words do make a

Re: gnash vs. flash

On 2010-03-21 14:01, Dotan Cohen wrote: [snip] Is "zeal" a negative word as well? Googling it I see only positive connotations. No. zeal: positive connotations. zealot: negative connotations. English is tricky that way. -- Obsession with "preserving cultural heritage" is a racist impedimen

Re: gnash vs. flash

>> Is Debian not openly resisting the legal yet anti-civilian wrath of >> those who would rule us, our software, and our rights to use our >> hardware as we see fit? > > Who is "Debian"?  Some developers are just trying to create the best > possible operating system.  Not everyone is out to change

Re: gnash vs. flash

Dotan writes: > Is Debian not openly resisting the legal yet anti-civilian wrath of > those who would rule us, our software, and our rights to use our > hardware as we see fit? Who is "Debian"? Some developers are just trying to create the best possible operating system. Not everyone is out to c

Re: gnash vs. flash

>> I now understand that there are negative connotations with the word >> "zealot". I did not mean it in a negative way at all. Mockery is >> flattery, and it gives stage to the idea. I wouldn't want Debian to >> change it's stance on the issue at all. >> > > There are negative connotations for a g

Re: gnash vs. flash

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Sun, 21 Mar 2010 20:15:58 +0200 Dotan Cohen wrote: > > > > The Firefox naming thing is entirely due to Mozilla's zealotry > > about their trademark. > > > > Correct. > > > > Go hang around the FSF for a while if you want to see some _real_ > >

Re: gnash vs. flash

>> The Firefox naming thing is entirely due to Mozilla's zealotry about >> their trademark. > > Could they be a bit sensitive, remembering the Debian ssl "patch"? Or was > that in the wrong time span? > I'm pretty sure the Iceweasel thing was before the SSL patch incident became known. >> Go han

Re: gnash vs. flash

> IIUC Debian changed the name upon explicit request from the Mozilla > foundation, so while it's silly, it doesn't seem to be because of > Debian's zeal. > It's both: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iceweasel Therefore, I mock them both. -- Dotan Cohen http://bido.com http://what-is-what.com Pl

Re: gnash vs. flash

On 21 March 2010 17:00, John Hasler wrote: > Dotan writes: >> Extreme devotion to the principals of FOSS... > > Debian is not extreme.  "IP" law is. > IP (why is there no property tax on that, by the way) law is extreme, I agree. Debian is one of the few entities treating it with the same extreme

Re: gnash vs. flash

> There is a quote, which I can't find now, which approximately says, > "Excess in defense of liberty is not excess." Said by a Republican... "Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue." Said by Barry Goldwat

Re: gnash vs. flash

On 2010-03-21 10:00, John Hasler wrote: Dotan writes: Extreme devotion to the principals of FOSS... Debian is not extreme. "IP" law is. ...and the willingness to sacrifice usability (confuse users with application naming, for one) to achieve that goal. The Firefox naming thing is entirely

Re: gnash vs. flash

> How about Puddlerodent? Would that be an appropriate form of mockery > of the situation? I mock both Debian (zealotry) and primarily Mozilla > (love-hate relationship with FOSS and control freaks) with that one. IIUC Debian changed the name upon explicit request from the Mozilla foundation, so w

Re: gnash vs. flash

Dotan writes: > Extreme devotion to the principals of FOSS... Debian is not extreme. "IP" law is. > ...and the willingness to sacrifice usability (confuse users with >application naming, for one) to achieve that goal. The Firefox naming thing is entirely due to Mozilla's zealotry about their tr

Re: gnash vs. flash

On 21 March 2010 14:42, John Hasler wrote: > Dotan writes: >> How about Puddlerodent? Would that be an appropriate form of mockery >> of the situation? I mock both Debian (zealotry) > > What "zealotry"? > Extreme devotion to the principals of FOSS, and the willingness to sacrifice usability (conf

Re: gnash vs. flash

Dotan writes: > How about Puddlerodent? Would that be an appropriate form of mockery > of the situation? I mock both Debian (zealotry) What "zealotry"? -- John Hasler -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@

Re: [semi-SOLVED] Re: Why does installing gnome packages versioned 2.28+6 insist on installing gnash?

On 2010-03-20 21:57:24 -0400, Celejar wrote: > Well, a quick search seems to indicate that some DEs already have this, > e.g. Gnome, with its /etc/gnome/defaults.lst. I guess you want > something that's DE independent. But even under GNOME, one may use non-GNOME applications (e.g. Mutt), which wo

[OT] iceweasel vs. Firefox (was gnash vs. flash)

On Sun, 21 Mar 2010 05:57:20 -0400 (EDT), Dotan Cohen wrote: > Stefan Monnier wrote: >> Ah, good catch, thank you.  You can say "Firefox" even if >> Debian has to say "Iceweasel". > > How about Puddlerodent? Would that be an appropriate form of mockery > of the situation? I mock both Debian (zealo

Re: (OT) LaTeX vs Word vs OOo (was: (OT) gnash vs. flash)

On 2010-03-18 17:21:26 +0200, Micha Feigin wrote: > On Thu, 18 Mar 2010 14:24:12 +0100 > Vincent Lefevre wrote: > > This is fine as long as you don't publish articles via commercial > > publishers. The IEEE Computer Society now uses Microsoft Word, and > > the files they produce are not correctly

Re: gnash vs. flash

> Ah, good catch, thank you.  You can say "Firefox" even if > Debian has to say "Iceweasel". > How about Puddlerodent? Would that be an appropriate form of mockery of the situation? I mock both Debian (zealotry) and primarily Mozilla (love-hate relationship with FOSS and control freaks) with that

Re: [semi-SOLVED] Re: Why does installing gnome packages versioned 2.28+6 insist on installing gnash?

On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 02:15:40PM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > On 2010-03-18 05:13:33 -0500, Mark Allums wrote: > > My initial difficulties are mitigated a bit. Some web sites work; > > some don't. I think that both Gnash and Flash can be installed at > > the sam

Re: [semi-SOLVED] Re: Why does installing gnome packages versioned 2.28+6 insist on installing gnash?

On Sat, 20 Mar 2010 21:19:54 -0500 Ron Johnson wrote: > On 2010-03-20 21:06, Andrew Winnenberg wrote: > > On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 9:57 PM, Celejar wrote: > >> On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 16:24:11 -0500 > >> Ron Johnson wrote: > >> > >> ... > >> > >>> For example, which apps to use open jpeg files, PDF

Re: [semi-SOLVED] Re: Why does installing gnome packages versioned 2.28+6 insist on installing gnash?

On 2010-03-20 21:06, Andrew Winnenberg wrote: On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 9:57 PM, Celejar wrote: On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 16:24:11 -0500 Ron Johnson wrote: ... For example, which apps to use open jpeg files, PDF files, ODF, DOC, XLS, etc, whether I'm in Thunar, Thunderbird, Evolution, Mutt, gentoo

Re: [semi-SOLVED] Re: Why does installing gnome packages versioned 2.28+6 insist on installing gnash?

On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 9:57 PM, Celejar wrote: > On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 16:24:11 -0500 > Ron Johnson wrote: > > ... > >> For example, which apps to use open jpeg files, PDF files, ODF, DOC, >> XLS, etc, whether I'm in Thunar, Thunderbird, Evolution, Mutt, >> gentoo or any of a dozen other file mana

Re: [semi-SOLVED] Re: Why does installing gnome packages versioned 2.28+6 insist on installing gnash?

On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 16:24:11 -0500 Ron Johnson wrote: ... > For example, which apps to use open jpeg files, PDF files, ODF, DOC, > XLS, etc, whether I'm in Thunar, Thunderbird, Evolution, Mutt, > gentoo or any of a dozen other file managers. > > There should be a freedesktop standard for file

Re: (OT) gnash vs. flash (was Re: Why does installing gnome ...)

On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 10:55:02PM +0200, Dotan Cohen wrote: > > And yet me getting-old laptop is still snappy.  I think it's more that MSO > > is written in absurdly-tuned C & assembler, whereas OOo is portable C++ & > > Java. > > > > Actually, MSO is written in a high-level language. I forget wh

[Semi-OT] Difficulties in moving to Linux (was Re: (OT) gnash vs. flash ...)

On 2010-03-18 03:41, Andrei Popescu wrote: On Thu,18.Mar.10, 03:28:40, Ron Johnson wrote: The main problem is all the 3rd party applications written specifically for Word and Excel which have no analog in the OOo world. Interesting, I didn't come across such things in my company A

Re: [semi-SOLVED] Re: Why does installing gnome packages versioned 2.28+6 insist on installing gnash?

On 2010-03-19 14:20, Celejar wrote: On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 06:39:49 -0500 Ron Johnson wrote: ... XFce only allows the user to choose MUA or browser. Win XP allows the user to make all sorts of user-specific application choices. A lot of this stuff is really probably better handled at the indi

Re: (OT) LaTeX vs Word vs OOo (was: (OT) gnash vs. flash)

On Thu, 18 Mar 2010 14:24:12 +0100 Vincent Lefevre wrote: > On 2010-03-18 10:19:07 +0200, Micha wrote: > > Personally though I use lyx for anything I can get away with. > > Luckily in university mathematics no one knows word. Almost everyone > > apart for a few students that haven't converted yet

Re: [semi-SOLVED] Re: Why does installing gnome packages versioned 2.28+6 insist on installing gnash?

On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 06:39:49 -0500 Ron Johnson wrote: ... > XFce only allows the user to choose MUA or browser. Win XP allows > the user to make all sorts of user-specific application choices. A lot of this stuff is really probably better handled at the individual application level. For exam

Re: [semi-SOLVED] Re: Why does installing gnome packages versioned 2.28+6 insist on installing gnash?

On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 00:22:51 -0400, Stefan Monnier wrote: >>> My initial difficulties are mitigated a bit. Some web sites work; >>> some don't. I think that both Gnash and Flash can be installed at the >>> same time. Which is actually running, I am

Re: [semi-SOLVED] Re: Why does installing gnome packages versioned 2.28+6 insist on installing gnash?

On 2010-03-19 06:31, Andrei Popescu wrote: On Fri,19.Mar.10, 11:53:28, Vincent Lefevre wrote: On 2010-03-19 00:22:51 -0400, Stefan Monnier wrote: update-alternatives --display flash-mozilla.so update-alternatives --config flash-mozilla.so The choice should really be made at the level of indivi

Re: [semi-SOLVED] Re: Why does installing gnome packages versioned 2.28+6 insist on installing gnash?

On Fri,19.Mar.10, 11:53:28, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > On 2010-03-19 00:22:51 -0400, Stefan Monnier wrote: > > > update-alternatives --display flash-mozilla.so > > > update-alternatives --config flash-mozilla.so > > > > The choice should really be made at the level of individual users rther > > than

Re: [semi-SOLVED] Re: Why does installing gnome packages versioned 2.28+6 insist on installing gnash?

On 2010-03-19 05:53, Vincent Lefevre wrote: On 2010-03-19 00:22:51 -0400, Stefan Monnier wrote: update-alternatives --display flash-mozilla.so update-alternatives --config flash-mozilla.so The choice should really be made at the level of individual users rther than system-wide. Yes, I complet

Re: [semi-SOLVED] Re: Why does installing gnome packages versioned 2.28+6 insist on installing gnash?

On 2010-03-19 00:22:51 -0400, Stefan Monnier wrote: > > update-alternatives --display flash-mozilla.so > > update-alternatives --config flash-mozilla.so > > The choice should really be made at the level of individual users rther > than system-wide. Yes, I completely agree. BTW, this is not specif

Re: gnash vs. flash

> [...] >> >> At worst it may require some changes to Firefox. >> > A bug report against IW? >> What's "IW"? > iceweasel? Ah, good catch, thank you. You can say "Firefox" even if Debian has to say "Iceweasel". Stefan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org w

Re: [semi-SOLVED] Re: Why does installing gnome packages versioned 2.28+6 insist on installing gnash?

>> My initial difficulties are mitigated a bit. Some web sites work; >> some don't. I think that both Gnash and Flash can be installed at >> the same time. Which is actually running, I am not competent enough >> to know. > update-alternatives --display flash-

Re: (OT) gnash vs. flash (was Re: Why does installing gnome ...)

On 2010-03-18 19:04, Kelly Clowers wrote: [snip] MSO (all versions) is almost entirely C++, like most MS programs and Win32 itself. Most of the very low-level stuff (including the NT Kernel) is in C. C++ had barely been invented when Word, Excel & Access were written, and the compilers and l

Re: (OT) gnash vs. flash (was Re: Why does installing gnome ...)

On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 20:55, Dotan Cohen wrote: >> And yet me getting-old laptop is still snappy.  I think it's more that MSO >> is written in absurdly-tuned C & assembler, whereas OOo is portable C++ & >> Java. >> > > Actually, MSO is written in a high-level language. I forget which, but > it's

Re: (OT) gnash vs. flash (was Re: Why does installing gnome ...)

On 2010-03-18 15:55, Dotan Cohen wrote: And yet me getting-old laptop is still snappy. I think it's more that MSO is written in absurdly-tuned C & assembler, whereas OOo is portable C++ & Java. Actually, MSO is written in a high-level language. I forget which, but it's not .NET. They do that

Re: (OT) gnash vs. flash (was Re: Why does installing gnome ...)

On 3/18/2010 3:44 PM, Ron Johnson wrote: On 2010-03-18 11:47, Sjoerd Hiemstra wrote: Andrei Popescu: Ron Johnson: Lastly, Excel, Word, IE & Lookout just launch faster than Calc, Write, FF & Tbird. That's too bad. The comparison is not quite fair, since the former are being preloaded in Wind

Re: (OT) gnash vs. flash (was Re: Why does installing gnome ...)

> And yet me getting-old laptop is still snappy.  I think it's more that MSO > is written in absurdly-tuned C & assembler, whereas OOo is portable C++ & > Java. > Actually, MSO is written in a high-level language. I forget which, but it's not .NET. They do that because there are a lot of bugs, and

Re: (OT) gnash vs. flash (was Re: Why does installing gnome ...)

On 2010-03-18 11:47, Sjoerd Hiemstra wrote: Andrei Popescu: Ron Johnson: Lastly, Excel, Word, IE & Lookout just launch faster than Calc, Write, FF & Tbird. That's too bad. The comparison is not quite fair, since the former are being preloaded in Windows. And yet me getting-old laptop is s

Re: gnash vs. flash

On 2010-03-18 10:55, Stephen Powell wrote: On Thu, 18 Mar 2010 11:36:11 -0400 (EDT), Stefan Monnier wrote: What's "IW"? I think that means iceweasel. Yes, thanks. -- Obsession with "preserving cultural heritage" is a racist impediment to moral, physical and intellectual progress. -- To U

RE: (OT) gnash vs. flash (was Re: Why does installing gnome ...)

> -Original Message- > From: Andrei Popescu [mailto:andreimpope...@gmail.com] > Sent: Thursday, 18 March, 2010 00:42 > To: debian-user@lists.debian.org > Subject: Re: (OT) gnash vs. flash (was Re: Why does > installing gnome ...) > > On Thu,18.Mar.10, 03:

Re: gnash vs. flash

On 18 March 2010 17:50, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > On 2010-03-18 11:36:11 -0400, Stefan Monnier wrote: > [...] >> >> At worst it may require some changes to Firefox. >> >> > A bug report against IW? >> >> What's "IW"? > > iceweasel? > The Debian branding of Firefox. -- Dotan Cohen http://bido.co

Re: [SOLVED] Re: Why does installing gnome packages versioned 2.28+6 insist on installing gnash?

On 3/18/2010 11:39 AM, Mark Allums wrote: The order of installation seems to matter. Installing Gnash, and then (re-)installing Flash caused most embedded videos to play properly. I have not tried Flash-based UIs, like Flash games. To put the nail in the coffin of this, after a lot of

Re: (OT) gnash vs. flash (was Re: Why does installing gnome ...)

>> > Lastly, Excel, Word, IE & Lookout just launch faster than Calc, >> > Write, FF & Tbird. >> >> That's too bad. > > The comparison is not quite fair, since the former are being preloaded > in Windows. > For one thing, you can preload in Linux as well. For users with 2GB RAM or more, I enable th

Re: (OT) gnash vs. flash (was Re: Why does installing gnome ...)

Andrei Popescu: > Ron Johnson: > > Lastly, Excel, Word, IE & Lookout just launch faster than Calc, > > Write, FF & Tbird. > > That's too bad. The comparison is not quite fair, since the former are being preloaded in Windows. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org wit

Re: [SOLVED] Re: Why does installing gnome packages versioned 2.28+6 insist on installing gnash?

On 3/18/2010 5:13 AM, Mark Allums wrote: On 3/17/2010 10:40 AM, Stefan Monnier wrote: Installing Gnash screws up Flash. That is the core of the problem that needs to be fixed. There's no reason the two shouldn't be able to coexist peacefully so that each user on the machine can ch

Re: gnash vs. flash

On 2010-03-18 11:36:11 -0400, Stefan Monnier wrote: [...] > >> At worst it may require some changes to Firefox. > > > A bug report against IW? > > What's "IW"? iceweasel? -- Vincent Lefèvre - Web: 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog:

Re: gnash vs. flash

On Thu, 18 Mar 2010 11:36:11 -0400 (EDT), Stefan Monnier wrote: > What's "IW"? I think that means iceweasel. -- .''`. Stephen Powell : :' : `. `'` `- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@

Re: gnash vs. flash

>> I'm not at all convinced the problem is packaging (there doesn't seem to >> be any conflict there). Last time I had a system with both Gnash and >> adobe's flash, the problem was that Firefox just seemed to insist on >> using Gnash even when I instructe

Re: (OT) gnash vs. flash

Celejar writes: > So apparently the stuff could actually be included in the official > archive, without violating the social contract? Dotan writes: > No, there is a difference between checking all software for possible > patent infringement and including known offenders. But the line is > grey, t

(OT) LaTeX vs Word vs OOo (was: (OT) gnash vs. flash)

On 2010-03-18 10:19:07 +0200, Micha wrote: > Personally though I use lyx for anything I can get away with. > Luckily in university mathematics no one knows word. Almost everyone > apart for a few students that haven't converted yet use latex. This is fine as long as you don't publish articles via

Re: [semi-SOLVED] Re: Why does installing gnome packages versioned 2.28+6 insist on installing gnash?

On 3/18/2010 8:15 AM, Vincent Lefevre wrote: On 2010-03-18 05:13:33 -0500, Mark Allums wrote: My initial difficulties are mitigated a bit. Some web sites work; some don't. I think that both Gnash and Flash can be installed at the same time. Which is actually running, I am not comp

  1   2   >