On Wed, 2011-11-09 at 23:48 -0500, Michael P. Soulier wrote:
> On 09/11/11 Paul Johnson said:
>
> > Why bother with non-free software when we're talking about a technology
> > that's dying like BSD these days?
>
> 'cause people like it when their systems...work?
Given it's stability, i wouldn't
On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 4:51 AM, Lisi Reisz wrote:
>
> And it didn't for me when I installed Lenny. I have just installed it
> manually. I have not got task-desktop, so do not need its
> dependencies.
>
> lisi@Junior:~$ aptitude search task-desktop
> lisi@Junior:~$
Keep in mind that the desktop
On Sat, 12 Nov 2011 09:04:30 -0500, Rob Owens wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 10:51:06AM +, Lisi Reisz wrote:
>> On 12 November 2011 09:56, Andrei POPESCU
>> wrote:
>> > On Jo, 10 nov 11, 08:56:46, Walter Hurry wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > Why do Linux distros consider it desirable to install
On 12 November 2011 14:04, Rob Owens wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 10:51:06AM +, Lisi Reisz wrote:
>> On 12 November 2011 09:56, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
>> > On Jo, 10 nov 11, 08:56:46, Walter Hurry wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > Why do Linux distros consider it desirable to install Gnash by
>>
On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 10:51:06AM +, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> On 12 November 2011 09:56, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> > On Jo, 10 nov 11, 08:56:46, Walter Hurry wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > Why do Linux distros consider it desirable to install Gnash by
> >> >> > default?
> >> >>
> >> >> Interesting questio
On 12 November 2011 09:56, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> On Jo, 10 nov 11, 08:56:46, Walter Hurry wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > Why do Linux distros consider it desirable to install Gnash by
>> >> > default?
>> >>
>> >> Interesting question. Which distributions do that?
>> >
>> > Debian of course :)
>>
>> It did
On Jo, 10 nov 11, 11:29:08, Bob Proulx wrote:
>
> Really this more than anything illustrates that nonfree programs and
> protocols are bad for us. It is important to prevent nonfree software
> from being required. This is what makes the need for HTML5 to be
> completely free so important. We ca
On Jo, 10 nov 11, 08:56:46, Walter Hurry wrote:
> >>
> >> > Why do Linux distros consider it desirable to install Gnash by
> >> > default?
> >>
> >> Interesting question. Which distributions do that?
> >
> > Debian of course :)
>
> It didn't for me when I installed Squeeze. Maybe I did it diffe
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 05:47:21PM -0700, Bob Proulx wrote:
> Robert Holtzman wrote:
> > Bob Proulx wrote:
> > > > A .deb package for firefox? Where?
> > >
> > > The Debian Mozilla team makes Firefox deb packages available for
> > > Stable that tracks the current release.
> > >
> > > http://moz
On Wed, 09 Nov 2011 18:18:53 +, T o n g wrote:
> Well, not exactly now but at lease Adobe flash is dead for all mobile
> devices:
>
> Adobe confirms Flash Player is dead for mobile devices
> http://www.engadget.com/2011/11/09/adobe-confirms-flash-player-is-dead-
> for-mobile-devices/
>
> Ste
On 11/11/11 11:47, Bob Proulx wrote:
> Robert Holtzman wrote:
>> Bob Proulx wrote:
A .deb package for firefox? Where?
>>>
>>> The Debian Mozilla team makes Firefox deb packages available for
>>> Stable that tracks the current release.
>>>
>>> http://mozilla.debian.net/
>>
>> Nothing about FF
Robert Holtzman wrote:
> Bob Proulx wrote:
> > > A .deb package for firefox? Where?
> >
> > The Debian Mozilla team makes Firefox deb packages available for
> > Stable that tracks the current release.
> >
> > http://mozilla.debian.net/
>
> Nothing about FF here or in any of the backport sites
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 11:31:29AM -0700, Bob Proulx wrote:
> Robert Holtzman wrote:
> > Michael P. Soulier wrote:
> > > Nice link. I'm using Squeeze so I have FF 3.5. I could update outside of
> > > the
> > > .deb package though to something more recent.
> >
> > A .deb package for firefox? Wher
Michael P. Soulier wrote:
> and I don't see youtube-dl packaged for squeeze.
The reason for this, as stated by the maintainer of youtube-dl himself,
is given in this post:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2009/12/msg00433.html
But the wheezy version appears to be working well in squeeze.
On Thu, 10 Nov 2011 12:26:50 -0700
Bob Proulx wrote:
...
> Because of this I always use the youtube-dl from Sid. It is a script.
> It only depends upon ffmpeg being installed. It runs just fine on
And ffmpeg is not even a hard dependency, only a recommends (not sure
what happens if ffmpeg isn
Celejar wrote:
> Michael P. Soulier wrote:
> > Celejar said:
> > > And of course, there's always youtube-dl, cclive, etc.
> >
> > when they work...
> >
> > fetch config ...done.
> > verify video link ...error: libquvi: server returned http/404
>
> Beats me - they usually work for me (I usually u
On Thu, 10 Nov 2011 08:45:49 -0500
"Michael P. Soulier" wrote:
> On 10/11/11 Celejar said:
>
> > And of course, there's always youtube-dl, cclive, etc.
>
> when they work...
>
> fetch config ...done.
> verify video link ...error: libquvi: server returned http/404
Beats me - they usually work
On Thu, 10 Nov 2011 17:44:35 +0530
"J. Bakshi" wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Nov 2011 07:02:55 -0500
> Celejar wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 10 Nov 2011 19:10:13 +1100
> > Scott Ferguson wrote:
> >
> > > On 10/11/11 15:46, Michael P. Soulier wrote:
> > > > On 09/11/11 T o n g said:
> > > >
> > > >> Adobe flash
Robert Holtzman wrote:
> Michael P. Soulier wrote:
> > Nice link. I'm using Squeeze so I have FF 3.5. I could update outside of the
> > .deb package though to something more recent.
>
> A .deb package for firefox? Where?
The Debian Mozilla team makes Firefox deb packages available for
Stable tha
Gilbert Sullivan wrote:
> Andrew Wood wrote:
> > Why do Linux distros consider it desirable to install Gnash by default?
> > I understand the desire to have a free flash player but Gnash is a very
> > poor implementation and I think it tarnishes Linux's image rather than
> > enhances it.
> > ...
>
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 08:39:30AM -0500, Michael P. Soulier wrote:
> On 10/11/11 Scott Ferguson said:
>
> > Choices are nice :-)
> >
> > http://www.youtube.com/html5
> >
> > (let youtube/google know *you* would prefer a choice).
>
> Nice link. I'm using Squeeze so I have FF 3.5. I could update
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 07:10:13PM +1100, Scott Ferguson wrote:
>
> Choices are nice :-)
>
> http://www.youtube.com/html5
>
> (let youtube/google know *you* would prefer a choice).
>
Thanks for the link, didn't know about that.
Cheers,
Tom
--
Mike: "The Fourth Dimension is a shambles?"
Be
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 00:07, Lorenzo Sutton wrote:
>
> youtube ... is still very 'betqaish' with html5
You must be using a different YouTube than me. I have had very little
in the way of problems with HTML5 on YT, and nothing recently. Not
all videos are available in HTML5 yet, but fallback has
On 10/11/11 Celejar said:
> And of course, there's always youtube-dl, cclive, etc.
when they work...
fetch config ...done.
verify video link ...error: libquvi: server returned http/404
I get that for cclive on every url...
and I don't see youtube-dl packaged for squeeze.
Mike
signature.asc
On 10/11/11 Scott Ferguson said:
> Choices are nice :-)
>
> http://www.youtube.com/html5
>
> (let youtube/google know *you* would prefer a choice).
Nice link. I'm using Squeeze so I have FF 3.5. I could update outside of the
.deb package though to something more recent.
Remember when Firefox
On Thu, 10 Nov 2011 07:02:55 -0500
Celejar wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Nov 2011 19:10:13 +1100
> Scott Ferguson wrote:
>
> > On 10/11/11 15:46, Michael P. Soulier wrote:
> > > On 09/11/11 T o n g said:
> > >
> > >> Adobe flash is one of the tech-inventions that I resent the most.
> > >> Now it is dea
On Thu, 10 Nov 2011 19:10:13 +1100
Scott Ferguson wrote:
> On 10/11/11 15:46, Michael P. Soulier wrote:
> > On 09/11/11 T o n g said:
> >
> >> Adobe flash is one of the tech-inventions that I resent the most.
> >> Now it is dead for all mobiles, and I wish it is dead on the web tomorrow.
> >
>
On Thu, 10 Nov 2011 10:28:53 +0200, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> On Mi, 09 nov 11, 20:14:28, Walter Hurry wrote:
>> On Wed, 09 Nov 2011 19:51:14 +, Andrew Wood wrote:
>>
>> > Why do Linux distros consider it desirable to install Gnash by
>> > default?
>>
>> Interesting question. Which distributio
On 10/11/2011 09:22, Scott Ferguson wrote:
On 10/11/11 19:07, Lorenzo Sutton wrote:
On 09/11/2011 19:18, T o n g wrote:
Well, not exactly now but at lease Adobe flash is dead for all mobile
devices:
Adobe confirms Flash Player is dead for mobile devices
http://www.engadget.com/2011/11/09/adobe
On Mi, 09 nov 11, 20:14:28, Walter Hurry wrote:
> On Wed, 09 Nov 2011 19:51:14 +, Andrew Wood wrote:
>
> > Why do Linux distros consider it desirable to install Gnash by default?
>
> Interesting question. Which distributions do that?
Debian of course :)
Regards,
Andrei
--
Offtopic discussi
On 10/11/11 19:07, Lorenzo Sutton wrote:
> On 09/11/2011 19:18, T o n g wrote:
>> Well, not exactly now but at lease Adobe flash is dead for all mobile
>> devices:
>>
>> Adobe confirms Flash Player is dead for mobile devices
>> http://www.engadget.com/2011/11/09/adobe-confirms-flash-player-is-dead-
On 10/11/11 15:46, Michael P. Soulier wrote:
> On 09/11/11 T o n g said:
>
>> Adobe flash is one of the tech-inventions that I resent the most.
>> Now it is dead for all mobiles, and I wish it is dead on the web tomorrow.
>
> I like watching youtube videos. Silverlight is a problem for me on Lin
On 09/11/2011 19:18, T o n g wrote:
Well, not exactly now but at lease Adobe flash is dead for all mobile
devices:
Adobe confirms Flash Player is dead for mobile devices
http://www.engadget.com/2011/11/09/adobe-confirms-flash-player-is-dead-
for-mobile-devices/
Steve Jobs wins: Flash being phas
On 09/11/11 T o n g said:
> Adobe flash is one of the tech-inventions that I resent the most.
> Now it is dead for all mobiles, and I wish it is dead on the web tomorrow.
I like watching youtube videos. Silverlight is a problem for me on Linux, so I
find flash to be a good thing by comparison, u
On 09/11/11 Paul Johnson said:
> Why bother with non-free software when we're talking about a technology
> that's dying like BSD these days?
'cause people like it when their systems...work?
Mike
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On 10/11/11 13:38, Weaver wrote:
> On Wed, 09 Nov 2011 16:10:31 -0800
> Paul Johnson wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 2011-11-09 at 19:51 +, Andrew Wood wrote:
>>> Why do Linux distros consider it desirable to install Gnash by
>>> default? I understand the desire to have a free flash player but
>>> Gnash
On Wed, 09 Nov 2011 16:10:31 -0800
Paul Johnson wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-11-09 at 19:51 +, Andrew Wood wrote:
> > Why do Linux distros consider it desirable to install Gnash by
> > default? I understand the desire to have a free flash player but
> > Gnash is a very poor implementation and I thin
On Wed, 09 Nov 2011 16:10:31 -0800
Paul Johnson wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-11-09 at 19:51 +, Andrew Wood wrote:
> > Why do Linux distros consider it desirable to install Gnash by
> > default? I understand the desire to have a free flash player but
> > Gnash is a very poor implementation and I thin
>> Why bother with non-free software when we're talking about a technology
>> that's dying like BSD these days?
> Because right now, realistically it's the only game in town if one wants
> to watch flash content. When HTML5 comes along and I am able to get rid
> of /usr/lib64/mozilla/plugins/libf
On 10/11/11 11:10, Paul Johnson wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-11-09 at 19:51 +, Andrew Wood wrote:
>> Why do Linux distros consider it desirable to install Gnash by
>> default?
Because most GNU/Linux distributions try and provide a secure user
experience. FFflash is the antidote for security.
Gnash
On Wed, 09 Nov 2011 16:10:31 -0800, Paul Johnson wrote:
> Why bother with non-free software when we're talking about a technology
> that's dying like BSD these days?
Because right now, realistically it's the only game in town if one wants
to watch flash content. When HTML5 comes along and I am a
On Wed, 2011-11-09 at 19:51 +, Andrew Wood wrote:
> Why do Linux distros consider it desirable to install Gnash by
> default? I understand the desire to have a free flash player but Gnash
> is a very poor implementation and I think it tarnishes Linux's image
> rather than enhances it.
Why bot
On 11/09/2011 02:51 PM, Andrew Wood wrote:
Why do Linux distros consider it desirable to install Gnash by default?
I understand the desire to have a free flash player but Gnash is a very
poor implementation and I think it tarnishes Linux's image rather than
enhances it.
Its buggy, a lot of conte
On 11/09/2011 02:51 PM, Andrew Wood wrote:
> Why do Linux distros consider it desirable to install Gnash by default?
> I understand the desire to have a free flash player but Gnash is a very
> poor implementation and I think it tarnishes Linux's image rather than
> enhances it.
>
> Its buggy, a lo
On Wed, 09 Nov 2011 19:51:14 +, Andrew Wood wrote:
> Why do Linux distros consider it desirable to install Gnash by default?
Interesting question. Which distributions do that?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Conta
On Wed, 09 Nov 2011 19:51:14 +, Andrew Wood wrote:
> Why do Linux distros consider it desirable to install Gnash by default?
Interesting question. Which distributions do that?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Conta
Why do Linux distros consider it desirable to install Gnash by default?
I understand the desire to have a free flash player but Gnash is a very
poor implementation and I think it tarnishes Linux's image rather than
enhances it.
Its buggy, a lot of content it cant display, or displays improperl
T o n g wrote:
Well, not exactly now but at lease Adobe flash is dead for all mobile
devices:
Adobe confirms Flash Player is dead for mobile devices
http://www.engadget.com/2011/11/09/adobe-confirms-flash-player-is-dead-
for-mobile-devices/
Steve Jobs wins: Flash being phased out from mobile
48 matches
Mail list logo
