| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
tam
Guru
Joined: 04 Mar 2003
Posts: 569
|
 Posted: Mon Jul 18, 2005 7:57 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Feature request sent. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
lotw
Guru
Joined: 09 Jan 2005
Posts: 342
Location: Palmdale
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 25, 2005 3:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Well it isn't really a bug, but more of a feature request. Hopefully enough people will request it so that maybe they will consider it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
grantl
n00b
Joined: 26 Dec 2003
Posts: 8
Location: Stuttgart, Germany
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 25, 2005 7:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I will get my new amd64 laptop next week and signed the petition in advance.
What do you think: will they (macromedia) react until next week?  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
R!tman
Veteran
Joined: 18 Dec 2003
Posts: 1303
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 25, 2005 7:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| grantl wrote: | I will get my new amd64 laptop next week and signed the petition in advance.
What do you think: will they (macromedia) react until next week? |
LOL |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
krall
n00b
Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 51
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 25, 2005 11:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Just added my own feature request.
Actually, i think it's a bug to deliver a product that does not support a major computer archetecture, but i guess it's a matter of terminilogy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ziegs
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 29 Apr 2004
Posts: 119
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 26, 2005 1:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| krall wrote: |
Actually, i think it's a bug to deliver a product that does not support a major computer archetecture |
not quite a bug no. and we're not quite a major architecture yet either. if you think about the small number of computers using x86_64, and then think of the smaller number of them running a linux distro, and then think of an even smaller number of people who care about using the 64bit bin of firefox as opposed to the 32bit binary, we're pretty tiny. i don't think they've even had to write a new player for x64 windows (not sure on that one, all i know is that when i'm in windows flash works and i installed flash from an old cd i had).
maybe with intel shoving their 64bit chips into EVERYTHING macromedia will wake up..perhaps |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Chuckinator
n00b
Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 25
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 26, 2005 5:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Signed it - One would think that they would have released a 64 bit version to go along with Windows XP 64-bit. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
R!tman
Veteran
Joined: 18 Dec 2003
Posts: 1303
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 26, 2005 7:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Chuckinator wrote: | | Signed it - One would think that they would have released a 64 bit version to go along with Windows XP 64-bit. |
No, they have not. Instead, there are both a 32bit and a 64bit IE. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Light
n00b
Joined: 15 Jun 2004
Posts: 21
Location: Netherlands
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 31, 2005 3:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| AdmiralNemo wrote: | Here is a copy of my post to them. I hope that professionalism will come across with more prestige than cursing, etc.
[..]
I am glad to see that there others out there who feel the same way I do about this. I only hope that Macromedia will see our side and follow through with our requests. |
I've filled out the feature request form also. And I like the text of AdmiralNemo, so I used that  Hope you don't mind. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
babo
Guru
Joined: 10 Aug 2004
Posts: 477
Location: Ljubljana
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 31, 2005 4:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| looks to me like gplflash 2 might be usefull before macromedia makes 64bit flash player, so maybe we should invest more energy in that one instead of some people who don't even reply to mails. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wiSHmaKeR
n00b
Joined: 04 May 2004
Posts: 44
Location: Stara Zagora, Bulgaria
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 31, 2005 5:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Did it! Signed. 
_________________
And all your wishes come true... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
R!tman
Veteran
Joined: 18 Dec 2003
Posts: 1303
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 31, 2005 8:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| babo wrote: | | looks to me like gplflash 2 might be usefull before macromedia makes 64bit flash player, so maybe we should invest more energy in that one instead of some people who don't even reply to mails. |
I believe this is the way to go. gplflash2 is available through cvs, but I have not seen an ebuild, yet.
Unfortunately, I have no time to do an ebuild (and I have never done a cvs ebuild before). Maybe someone else would be so kind. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
floam
Veteran
Joined: 27 Oct 2002
Posts: 1067
Location: Vancouver, WA USA
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 01, 2005 12:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
What do you need an ebuild for? Just check it out and build.
_________________
Think about your breathing.
http://floam.sh.nu |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rollbar
n00b
Joined: 16 Sep 2004
Posts: 26
Location: Sweden, STHLM
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 01, 2005 6:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| floam wrote: | | What do you need an ebuild for? Just check it out and build. |
What do you need portage for? It's convenient, practical and structured. :p
So yeah, an ebuild would be nice. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Somy
n00b
Joined: 14 Oct 2004
Posts: 34
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 01, 2005 7:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Rollbar wrote: | | floam wrote: | | What do you need an ebuild for? Just check it out and build. |
What do you need portage for? It's convenient, practical and structured. :p
So yeah, an ebuild would be nice. |
if you had search a little bit.... https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-342817-highlight-gplflash.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bigun
Advocate
Joined: 21 Sep 2003
Posts: 2196
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 01, 2005 8:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Honestly.... how hard is it to take already ready-to-go source and compile it against a 64-bit kernel? I myself am appauled by the laziness. I'm going to gplflash.
_________________
"It's ok, they might have guns but we have flowers." - Perpetual Victim |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
alshain
Apprentice
Joined: 02 Aug 2002
Posts: 202
Location: London, UK
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 02, 2005 4:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| R!tman wrote: | | babo wrote: | | looks to me like gplflash 2 might be usefull before macromedia makes 64bit flash player, so maybe we should invest more energy in that one instead of some people who don't even reply to mails. |
I believe this is the way to go. gplflash2 is available through cvs, but I have not seen an ebuild, yet.
|
All that gplflash2 has ever done for me in the couple of months of trying it is crash the browser every time I go to a flash web site. If they are making progress then it's unfortunately not visible.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Birtz
Apprentice
Joined: 09 Feb 2005
Posts: 272
Location: Osijek / Croatia
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 02, 2005 5:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| alshain wrote: |
All that gplflash2 has ever done for me in the couple of months of trying it is crash the browser every time I go to a flash web site. If they are making progress then it's unfortunately not visible. |
Ditto But I am not giving up hope on them. It is free Flash viewer, better to write them bug reports and help them stand against "strongly-and-only" profit driven software companies like Macromedia who doesn't really care for customers (be there 1 or 2 percent market share for us).
Regards
_________________
It is not enough to have a good mind. The main thing is to use it well.
-- Rene Descartes
Don't have a childhood hero? How about Rob Hubbard http://www.freenetpages.co.uk/hp/tcworh/profile.htm |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FIy
n00b
Joined: 24 Jun 2005
Posts: 72
Location: Hamburg, Germany
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 02, 2005 12:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| yes, done. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Koradji
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 01 Apr 2005
Posts: 86
Location: Perth, Australia
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 08, 2005 12:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Maybe, more useful than asking flash sites to either change or convince macromedia, we should ask flash sites to help support the gplflash project?
I understand people preferring an ebuild to building from cvs themselves. i can never remember how to do it.
_________________
koradji login: emerge nvidia-drivers
password: ... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
shimage
n00b
Joined: 18 Jul 2003
Posts: 48
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 09, 2005 5:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bigun89 wrote: | | Honestly.... how hard is it to take already ready-to-go source and compile it against a 64-bit kernel? I myself am appauled by the laziness. I'm going to gplflash. |
And I'm appalled at your spelling. It's easy enough to compile it without an ebuild, but since the only reason I use gentoo is because of portage, it pains me every time I have to do so. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mikemcquaid
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 11 May 2004
Posts: 108
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 10, 2005 11:00 am Post subject: Woops! |
|
|
| shimage wrote: | | bigun89 wrote: | | Honestly.... how hard is it to take already ready-to-go source and compile it against a 64-bit kernel? I myself am appauled by the laziness. I'm going to gplflash. |
And I'm appalled at your spelling. It's easy enough to compile it without an ebuild, but since the only reason I use gentoo is because of portage, it pains me every time I have to do so. |
He was talking about Macromedia, and how hard is it for them just to compile their linux flash source code for AMD64. In fact it is probably harder than you think. Not from personal experience, but look how hard it has been to get stuff like OOO.org, for example, working on AMD64. It's certainly not just a case of running gcc and it "just works".
Still, the size of the flash plugin and the size the source must be, it really is pathetically lazy for them not to bother. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bigun
Advocate
Joined: 21 Sep 2003
Posts: 2196
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 11, 2005 11:10 am Post subject: Re: Woops! |
|
|
| mikearthur wrote: | He was talking about Macromedia, and how hard is it for them just to compile their linux flash source code for AMD64. In fact it is probably harder than you think. Not from personal experience, but look how hard it has been to get stuff like OOO.org, for example, working on AMD64. It's certainly not just a case of running gcc and it "just works".
Still, the size of the flash plugin and the size the source must be, it really is pathetically lazy for them not to bother. |
So your saying they've probably at least tried? Somehow I doubt even that.
| shimage wrote: | | And I'm appalled at your spelling. It's easy enough to compile it without an ebuild, but since the only reason I use gentoo is because of portage, it pains me every time I have to do so. |
Your my hero
_________________
"It's ok, they might have guns but we have flowers." - Perpetual Victim |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
geniux
Veteran
Joined: 19 Feb 2004
Posts: 1400
Location: /home
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 11, 2005 2:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Have anyone got any answer from Macromedia?
_________________
AMD Athlon64 X2 4200+ AM2
MSI K9N SLI Platinum, Enermax Liberty 500W
1GB RAM Crucial DDR2 667MHz, MSI nVidia 7600GS 256MB
400GB + 250GB Samsung SATAII HDD
Gentoo - BeyondSources 2.6.19-20 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ketjow
Guru
Joined: 01 Apr 2004
Posts: 382
Location: Krakow, Poland
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 11, 2005 6:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| geniux wrote: | | Have anyone got any answer from Macromedia? |
rhetorical question? 
ehh.. i can't understand why they don't just compile this 2mb chunk of code on an athlon64 :/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Gentoo on AMD64
