Flash 10.1 Goes Final at Long Last

[madjr]

the tittle says it all grab it fast !

http://blogs.adobe.com/flashplayer/

http://www.pcworld.com/article/198533/flash_101_goes_final_at_long_last.html?tk=hp_blg

if you have the apt repo it should be in the updates

reply on performance please

report bugs:
https://bugs.adobe.com/flashplayer/

[coolbrook]

When will it go finally?

[TheNerdAL]

If we had the release candidate, do we have to get the final release?

[FuturePilot]

And at the same time, they kill the 64bit version. http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/flashplayer10/64bit.html :evil::mad:

[Frogs Hair]

And at the same time, they kill the 64bit version. http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/flashplayer10/64bit.html :evil::mad:

Thanks, I just updated W7 and was wondering why Firefox couldn't find an update for Ubuntu.

[lovinglinux]

Thanks, I just updated W7 and was wondering why Firefox couldn't find an update for Ubuntu.

I don't think the Ubuntu Firefox can update flash by itself, since Firefox is updated through the repositories and this feature is disabled by default. Although Firefox can update add-ons, plugins are also installed from the repositories.

[Frogs Hair]

I don't think the Ubuntu Firefox can update flash by itself, since Firefox is updated through the repositories and this feature is disabled by default. Although Firefox can update add-ons, plugins are also installed from the repositories.

Your right , Firefox only updates extensions & add-ons and shows the current version of flash and totem installed from the repository.

[Linuxforall]

And at the same time, they kill the 64bit version. http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/flashplayer10/64bit.html :evil::mad:

Saddest news ever, hate to use x32 flash with nsplugin wrapper. Hope HTML5 or some other alternate comes up fast. Good riddance flash and adobe.

[lovinglinux]

Saddest news ever, hate to use x32 flash with nsplugin wrapper. Hope HTML5 or some other alternate comes up fast. Good riddance flash and adobe.

Use the version 10.0.45 beta, is better than the 32bit.

[northwestuntu]

Use the version 10.0.45 beta, is better than the 32bit.

ya but doesn't that have the security holes though?

[lovinglinux]

ya but doesn't that have the security holes though?

EDIT: I removed my comment because it wasn't a good advice.

[northwestuntu]

Oh yes, I forgot about that. Nevertheless, you should be safe using NoScript and allowing only trusted sites.

i think it would be even safer though to just use the 32bit. even though i dont want too. :mad:

[FuturePilot]

ya but doesn't that have the security holes though?

Was the 64bit version affected by that? I never found an answer on that.

[madjr]

Was the 64bit version affected by that? I never found an answer on that.

not sure :confused:

[madjr]

If we had the release candidate, do we have to get the final release?

they fixed many bugs so is recommended.

[lovinglinux]

i think it would be even safer though to just use the 32bit. even though i dont want too. :mad:

Yes, indeed. I hope at least the new version fixes the problem of non-interactive buttons when using the 32bit with nspluginwrapper.


Was the 64bit version affected by that? I never found an answer on that.

There is no indication that the 64bit version is not affected.

[3rdalbum]

Honestly, Adobe should fire the guy who was working on the Linux port, and hire someone good. All he ever did was complain about Linux. He never fixed such an important bug as not being able to click on things on 64-bit, instead spending time on implementing support for the Broadcom Crystal HD coprocessor that approximately 0.5% of shipping laptops actually have.

Useless.

And Adobe are now the first company to actually abandon 64-bit in favor of 32-bit. Pathetic.

[philinux]

Was the 64bit version affected by that? I never found an answer on that.

There's a thread in the Meerkat testing forum.

Thats's why they pulled the 64 bit version. I've switched to the 32 bit plugin for now. Better safe than sorry.
http://www.adobe.com/support/security/advisories/apsa10-01.html

[lovinglinux]

There's a thread in the Meerkat testing forum.

Thats's why they pulled the 64 bit version. I've switched to the 32 bit plugin for now. Better safe than sorry.
http://www.adobe.com/support/security/advisories/apsa10-01.html

Lucid repositories still has the 10.0.45.2 version.

[philinux]

Lucid repositories still has the 10.0.45.2 version.

Yep it's in the wings though, been accepted. Should come through anytime.
Maybe the 32 bit guys have got it already?

http://www.mail-archive.com/lucid-changes@lists.ubuntu.com/maillist.html

[edit] http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8734465.stm

[lovinglinux]

Yep it's in the wings though, been accepted. Should come through anytime.

Thanks for the heads-up.


Maybe the 32 bit guys have got it already?

Not yet. I just tested it on a VM and it still 10.0.45.2.

[Swagman]

Update for 32 bit Flash came in early this morning when I updated (04:00).

[Merk42]

Thats's why they pulled the 64 bit version.
http://www.adobe.com/support/security/advisories/apsa10-01.html
Or they could have, I dunno, updated the 64bit version.

[Frogs Hair]

web Ud8 confirms flash 10.1 64bit is canceled .

[lovinglinux]

Update for 32 bit Flash came in early this morning when I updated (04:00).

Weird. I'm updating my 32bit Lucid on a VM and then will install flash again to see if I get the new version.

[samalex]

Did they scrap the 64-bit version for Flash for Linux? Adobe has been saying it'll be released when all other versions are released for almost a year now, so is this not true?

http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/flashplayer10/64bit.html

The Flash Player 10.1 64-bit Linux beta is closed. We remain committed to delivering 64-bit support in a future release of Flash Player. No further information is available at this time. Please feel free to continue your discussions on the Flash Player 10.1 desktop forums.

I've been using the alpha 64-bit version of Flash for months now, and though it's more stable than the 32-bit using the wrapper, it's still buggy.

So I guess the 64-bit Linux users are once again left on the back burner.

Update: ZDNet has picked it up here: http://www.zdnet.com.au/has-adobe-killed-64-bit-flash-339303810.htm

Sam

[aaaantoine]

Ich. I installed 32-bit Ubuntu on this desktop because I was too frugal (and lazy) to burn yet another Ubuntu CD for 64-bit.

Now I'm glad I went with 32-bit. I'd been using nothing but 64-bit on the laptop and there's always something that doesn't work well because of it. I mean for the most part it's smooth sailing, but then you have packages like the Adobe Flash player that one day has a 64-bit port, then the next decides to drop it, and back to nspluginwrapper you go. *shudder*

[northwestuntu]

Or they could have, I dunno, updated the 64bit version.

ya that would have been nice :mad:

[lovinglinux]

Update for 32 bit Flash came in early this morning when I updated (04:00).

I was able to get the new version for 32bit. It is the adobe-flashplugin from partner repository. The flashplugin-installer package is still 10.0.45.2 tho.

[philinux]

Just got the 10.1 update. Must have been propagating through he mirrors.
Shockwave Flash

File: /var/lib/flashplugin-installer/npwrapper.libflashplayer.so
Version:
Shockwave Flash 10.1 r53

[betrunkenaffe]

Or they could have, I dunno, updated the 64bit version.

No time, they need to start on their 16 bit flash player.

[xebian]

64-bit users - save your flash file

http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/flashplayer10/64bit.html

[aysiu]

64-bit users - save your flash file

http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/flashplayer10/64bit.html

The Flash Player 10.1 64-bit Linux beta is closed. We remain committed to delivering 64-bit support in a future release of Flash Player. No further information is available at this time. Please feel free to continue your discussions on the Flash Player 10.1 desktop forums. Doesn't the part I bolded mean they haven't killed it?

[xebian]

Doesn't the part I bolded mean they haven't killed it?

Between now and when it gets resurrected it's dead.

[Merk42]

Does this really need its own thread?
It's not about Maverick and there's a thread IN Maverick about the Flash player anyway.

Ayisu, no future updates and the most recent version has a security issue, what would you call it?

[taavikko]

Between now and when it gets resurrected it's dead.

It may be killed due to the fact of that CVE.
Or Adobe lacks the motivation to develop something that is going to die :-({|=

[xebian]

Does this really need its own thread?
It's not about Maverick ..



So tell me what is 'about Maverick'? Anything not made/distributed by Canonical is not?

[kahumba]

It may be killed due to the fact of that CVE.
Or Adobe lacks the motivation to develop something that is going to die :-({|=
Which proves what some folks said before, including I guess Steve Jobs, that Adobe is lazy. No excuse, 64 bit has been coming for years, plus 64 bit is already an important player in terms of market share, only a loser would quit under the pretext that they're too busy or not even mention why (whatever). That's how Sun Microsystems got broken in the end, they used noble excuses all the time since 2003. Losers find excuses, winners find ways to get the job done.

[aysiu]

Ayisu, no future updates and the most recent version has a security issue, what would you call it? I'd call it on hold until the next release.

[SevenMachines]

i've had a 64 bit flash ppa for a while now, if anyones read up on the problem, is this security hole/lack of any adobe support a good enough reason to pull it? as usual, i've only half been paying attention :)

[EDIT] partly because the world cup has just started the bafana bafana have just scored!

[philinux]

Threads merged.

[pricetech]

And at the same time, they kill the 64bit version. http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/flashplayer10/64bit.html :evil::mad:

Nice. Get ready for a lot more blame to be laid on Ubuntu / Linux for it not working.

[RiceMonster]

So this means I have to switch to the nsplugin wapper version or stick with an older version with security holes? Lame :(.

[lovinglinux]

i've had a 64 bit flash ppa for a while now, if anyones read up on the problem, is this security hole/lack of any adobe support a good enough reason to pull it? as usual, i've only half been paying attention :)

[EDIT] partly because the world cup has just started the bafana bafana have just scored!

Yes, it is a good reason to pull it. Nevertheless, if you are desperate, you could use NoScript and only allow flash on sites you trust. Be careful tho.

I was experiencing problems to watch the world cup from a local network stream. I fixed it by installing the 32bit version with nspluginwrapper, then downloading the 10.1 version from Adobe and extracting the plugin file into /usr/lib/flashplugin-installer. It works fine now. Anyway, you could just wait for the 32bit version to show up in the 64bit repository.

[SevenMachines]

Yes, it is a good reason to pull it. Nevertheless, if you are desperate, you could use NoScript and only allow flash on sites you trust. Be careful tho.

I was experiencing problems to watch the world cup from a local network stream. I fixed it by installing the 32bit version with nspluginwrapper, then downloading the 10.1 version from Adobe and extracting the plugin file into /usr/lib/flashplugin-installer. It works fine now. Anyway, you could just wait for the 32bit version to show up in the 64bit repository.
always use noscript :) i meant pull the ppa since its one of mine, or i could put a big warning in the description. i take it the security bug is quite serious since adobe have ditched the plugin altogether (for the moment anyway)

[EDIT] I've added a warning to the ppa, i'll leave it up for the moment though

[sydbat]

So this means I have to switch to the nsplugin wapper version or stick with an older version with security holes? Lame :(.I was thinking this too. The 64bit version is working better than the 32bit version does, so I guess I'll just keep running it for now...with No Script. *keeps fingers crossed...and eyes too*

[samalex]

So this means I have to switch to the nsplugin wapper version or stick with an older version with security holes? Lame :(.

No kidding... I'm in the same boat. I like the pro's of 64-bit so I'll probably stick with it even though I hoped to move from 9.04 to 10.04 in the upcoming weeks, but sucks that I'll have to stick with either the buggy nsplugin wrapper or a buggy Alpha version of Flash 64-bit.

Sam

[FuturePilot]

I'd call it on hold until the next release.

Given Adobe's history, I wouldn't hold your breath.

[samalex]

Anyone know of Gnash (http://www.gnashdev.org/) can be compiled to work with 64-bit Linux? I doubt it has all the fancy support Flash has (camera, etc) but it may be a nice alternative if it at least has native 64-bit support.

Sam

[Gavin77]

I'm using 10.1 with nspluginwrapper and it consistently crashes when right-clicking on flash, tested on the following sites with both Firefox & Chrome.

http://www.adobe.com/software/flash/about/
http://xml.riverisland.com/flash/content.php
Youtube profile pages.

Seems like a very rushed release.
I defended Adobe when Steve Jobs attacked them but I've changed my mind now.

[Frogs Hair]

I just installed 10.1 with the wrapper an hour ago and it's working well so far in Namoroka 3.6.6

[Gavin77]

I just 10.1 with the wrapper an hour ago and it's working well so far in Namoroka 3.6.6

Try to access the flash options by right-clicking on videos etc.

[lovinglinux]

Try to access the flash options by right-clicking on videos etc.

Works for me.

[lovinglinux]

I'm using 10.1 with nspluginwrapper and it consistently crashes when right-clicking on flash, tested on the following sites with both Firefox & Chrome.

http://www.adobe.com/software/flash/about/
http://xml.riverisland.com/flash/content.php
Youtube profile pages.

Seems like a very rushed release.
I defended Adobe when Steve Jobs attacked them but I've changed my mind now.

Indeed it is freezing Firefox when right-clicking on the Adobe page. Nevertheless, it works fine on YouTube.

[Frogs Hair]

Try to access the flash options by right-clicking on videos etc.

Works here too .

[lovinglinux]

Version 10.1 is available in the 64bit repositories now. It is the 32bit version with nspluginwrapper tho.

[Frogs Hair]

That is what I installed

[WinterRain]

And at the same time, they kill the 64bit version. http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/flashplayer10/64bit.html :evil::mad:

They are stopping development on the 10.1 version of 64bit, but they are not killing off 64bit flash entirely. From adobe: "We remain committed to delivering 64-bit support in a future release of Flash Player."

But yeah, it will be a good day when flash is history.

[WinterRain]

Version 10.1 is available in the 64bit repositories now. It is the 32bit version with nspluginwrapper tho.

No thanks. The native 64bit plugin (10.0.45.2) works better.But it appears they pulled that file off their site. But I have copies of it for safe keeping. If anyone needs it, let me know and I'll email it to you.

[FuturePilot]

They are stopping development on the 10.1 version of 64bit, but they are not killing off 64bit flash entirely. From adobe: "We remain committed to delivering 64-bit support in a future release of Flash Player."

But yeah, it will be a good day when flash is history.

They've been saying they're committed to delivering 64bit support for years. Like I said before, I wouldn't hold your breath. We'll get 64bit Flash when we've moved on to 128bit.

[SevenMachines]

No thanks. The native 64bit plugin (10.0.45.2) works better.But it appears they pulled that file off their site. But I have copies of it for safe keeping. If anyone needs it, let me know and I'll email it to you.
i'll leave the ppa up (https://launchpad.net/%7Esevenmachines/+archive/flash) for anyone who's using it (with warnings) but i think adobe's approach probably re-iterates the need to work on nspluginwrapper, and preferably, an open web standard :)

[Frogs Hair]

The Adobe Hack & Patch Cycle continues :-$

[lovinglinux]

No thanks. The native 64bit plugin (10.0.45.2) works better.But it appears they pulled that file off their site. But I have copies of it for safe keeping. If anyone needs it, let me know and I'll email it to you.

The direct link (http://download.macromedia.com/pub/labs/flashplayer10/libflashplayer-10.0.45.2.linux-x86_64.so.tar.gz) still works.


i'll leave the ppa up (https://launchpad.net/%7Esevenmachines/+archive/flash) for anyone who's using it (with warnings) but i think adobe's approach probably re-iterates the need to work on nspluginwrapper, and preferably, an open web standard :)

I decided to remove the support for 64bit entirely from my FLASH-AID (http://flash-aid-extension.blogspot.com) extension. Just released a new version that only allows to install the 32bit.

[SevenMachines]

I decided to remove the support for 64bit entirely from my FLASH-AID (http://flash-aid-extension.blogspot.com) extension. Just released a new version that only allows to install the 32bit.
personally i'm dropping using the 64 bit plugin myself, the 'second class citizen' approach was bearable as a rarely updated alpha when adobe were looking to bring 64 bit support together into 10.1 but if they aren't interested, neither am i

[WinterRain]

personally i'm dropping using the 64 bit plugin myself, the 'second class citizen' approach was bearable as a rarely updated alpha when adobe were looking to bring 64 bit support together into 10.1 but if they aren't interested, neither am i

That's a great attitude, but unfortunately I need flash to work, and 32bit flash with the pluginwrapper just doesn't cut it.

[SevenMachines]

That's a great attitude, but unfortunately I need flash to work, and 32bit flash with the pluginwrapper just doesn't cut it.
anyone who uses the internet needs flash to work, i meant focusing on getting the nspluginwrapper bugs ironed out rather than waiting on the long promised 64 bit support, at least short/medium term. but long term we really do need an open standard, theres been quite a few years of wrangling, it would be nice to have it sorted out since it is now such an intrinsic part of being on the internets

[philinux]

I reckon I'll instal 32 bit luci till this lot blows over. :shock:

The wrapper is not cutting it on some sites.

[FuturePilot]

I reckon I'll instal 32 bit luci till this lot blows over. :shock:

The wrapper is not cutting it on some sites.

You'll probably be waiting for quite a long time. Personally I'm not downgrading to a 32bit OS for a (piece of crap) plugin. But that's just me.

[Linuxforall]

I reckon I'll instal 32 bit luci till this lot blows over. :shock:

The wrapper is not cutting it on some sites.



Working fine here with Opera 10.10, Google Chrome and FF on Lucid x64. I was worried about nsplugin wrapper as it had given me hell with Intrepid but now thats working fine as well. So gonna keep x32 flash till x64 is officially released. Full screen videos are looking good as well with no jerkiness.

[taavikko]

I thought this is extremely funny, since Apple is fighting against flash and now Adobe is shooting itself in a leg :lolflag:

[CoreyB.]

Would enabling the apparmor profile for firefox help to mitigate the 64-bit flash vulnerabilities? Is there some other way that this could be mitigated?

[samwyse]

They've updated the statement to something more positive.

http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/flashplayer10/64bit.html

We have temporarily closed the Labs program of Flash Player 10 for 64-bit Linux, as we are making significant architectural changes to the 64-bit Linux Flash Player and additional security enhancements. We are fully committed to bringing native 64-bit Flash Player for the desktop by providing native support for Windows, Macintosh, and Linux 64-bit platforms in an upcoming major release of Flash Player. We intend to provide more regular update information on our progress as we continue our work on 64-bit versions of Flash Player. Thank you for your continued help and support. Stay tuned to the Flash Player discussion forum for further announcements.

Flash Player 10.0.45.2 and earlier has critical vulnerabilities. Basically you shouldn't use the 64 bit plugin anymore. http://www.adobe.com/support/security/bulletins/apsb10-14.html

[philinux]

They've updated the statement to something more positive.

http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/flashplayer10/64bit.html


Flash Player 10.0.45.2 and earlier has critical vulnerabilities. Basically you shouldn't use the 64 bit plugin anymore. http://www.adobe.com/support/security/bulletins/apsb10-14.html

That sounds more promising. Think I'll keep the 64 bit install with the 32 bit secure'ish flash for now then :mrgreen:

[Cavsfan]

Did I see a 64 bit flash coming down the pipeline today?

Here (http://www.mail-archive.com/lucid-changes@lists.ubuntu.com/msg11240.html)

[Merk42]

Did I see a 64 bit flash coming down the pipeline today?

Here (http://www.mail-archive.com/lucid-changes@lists.ubuntu.com/msg11240.html)

Running updates install the 32bit version, so I think that's all that is.

[Cavsfan]

Running updates install the 32bit version, so I think that's all that is.

What about this -
flashplugin-nonfree_10.1.53.64ubuntu0.10.04.1_amd64_translatio ns.tar.gz
which is included and probably won't be available until later today?

[Frogs Hair]

It is the is 32x with nsplugin wrapper I installed it yesterday .

[Martin Marshalek]

So is it really as dangerous as they're making this out to be or is it just a liability thing so adobe doesn't get sued? I, as well as a decent number of you probably, have been running the 64 bit alpha 10.0.45.2 release for months without issue, and I know if I switch to the 32 bit wrapped 10.1 I'll have new issues. I haven't had a single crash yet with this version so do I really need to change?

I would love to switch to HTML5 video but that is still a way away from being used as a drop in replacement for flash, though it is getting there on sites like Youtube and Vimeo.

[Frogs Hair]

See first web address in post 73 and make up your own mind.

[beastrace91]

And at the same time, they kill the 64bit version. http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/flashplayer10/64bit.html :evil::mad:

One more reason to be booting 32bit Ubuntu with a PAE kernel on my laptop...

~Jeff

[chris200x9]

w00t worse linux performace!

[soelk]

Is the performance worse than in 10.0? I'm using a slow computer and I don't know if I want to update in the middle of the World Cup. :)

I'm running the 32 bit version of Lucid.

I remember how long it took for the whole Microsoft PC "ecosystem" to make the jump from 16 bit to 32 bit. Get ready for five to ten more years of hassle before the 64 bit Linux and Windows ecosystems are fully mature. Apple user has it slightly easier because Apple is anal retentive...

[Merk42]

So I got rid of the 64bit figuring it would default to the 32bit one that it gave in the updates.

Now any site with Flash either makes Firefox unresponsive, or completely crashes it.

AWESOME

[RiceMonster]

I switched to the 32 bit wrapped version on Fedora, and so far I have not had any issues. However, I did have to pull in tons of 32 bit libraries to make it work. Wonderful! I really hope they bring back the 64 bit version, but I'm not counting on it.

[Cavsfan]

I believe I still have 64 bit beta installed, but I was wondering if anyone knew how to check if your flash is 32 bit or 64 bit?
I have a copy of the 64 bit beta flash...
Thanks

[lovinglinux]

I believe I still have 64 bit beta installed, but I was wondering if anyone knew how to check if your flash is 32 bit or 64 bit?
I have a copy of the 64 bit beta flash...
Thanks

Type about:config in Firefox address bar, then type plugin.expose_full_path in the filter and double-click that preference in the results to make it true. Then type about:plugins and find Shockwave Flash Path value. If it the path ends with npwrapper.libflashplayer.so than you are using the 32bit version, otherwise you are using the 64bit (if you have a 64bit browser).

[Cavsfan]

Type about:config in Firefox address bar, then type plugin.expose_full_path in the filter and double-click that preference in the results to make it true. Then type about:plugins and find Shockwave Flash Path value. If it the path ends with npwrapper.libflashplayer.so than you are using the 32bit version, otherwise you are using the 64bit (if you have a 64bit browser).

It says /opt/java/64/jre1.6.0_20/lib/amd64/libnpjp2.so
So I guess I am good to go.
Thanks for sharing that very valuable information! :)

[lovinglinux]

Nevermind

[NightwishFan]

Flash 10.1rc is responsible for many headaches for me. Since it is always a security hole, I will use the 64-bit version anyway, and disable until I need.

[Cavsfan]

Nevermind

Am I using the bad version that is the security threat? If so, I'll install no-script.

[lovinglinux]

Am I using the bad version that is the security threat? If so, I'll install no-script.

I don't know, because you posted the info about java, not flash.

[Frogs Hair]

One way to find out is to type nsplugin into the software center search, if this configuration comes up you have 32x with the wrapper .

[kokonobs]

Great now iplayer does not work!! grrrrrrrrrrrrrr

[Cavsfan]

I don't know, because you posted the info about java, not flash.

Yea, I get those confused constantly.

[lovinglinux]

I must admit version 10.1.53 32bit version is working better than the old 64bit here. I can even get fullscreen on my ISP video streaming site, which didn't work before.

[Cavsfan]

I messed up my kernel the other day and did a fresh install, hence 32 bit flash. But, it is working great.
I did have to do step 3 of the flash workaround in order to be able to click any of the buttons on youtube.

But, all looks good so far.

[Cavsfan]

And I did try no-script the other day. I think I would rather throw my PC out the window than use that plugin!

:lolflag:

[cbrunhaver]

It's really to bad that they released this without support for VA-API, considering all of the work that went into hardware acceleration on Windows, Android and OSX platforms.

http://blogs.adobe.com/penguin.swf/2010/01/welcome_to_the_thicket.html

Kind of a lame excuse too. Still, we (the linux community) should be nice to Adobe for giving us anything and try to push (nicely) for something better. Otherwise, a lot of the big, monolithic application sweets (like Adobe CS) will never make it our way. There is really no equivalent (in a professional environment) to things like Adobe CS or Soliworks etc. and we need to take this whole thing with a smile and more of a positive outlook (carrots more than sticks) to try to get something better.

[megamaced]

I am running 64-BIT Ubuntu Lucid and Mozilla Firefox from the Nightlies PPA. I have never managed to get 32-BIT flash player to work properly, and that is including the recent 10.1 release which was pushed through the Partner Repository. Either I can't press play because all of the buttons are stuck, or the thing just wont go into full screen. And yes I have tried downloading Flash straight from Adobe and running nspluginwrapper manually. Maybe I am cursed for using a laptop with ATi graphics but who knows..

Simply put the 64 BIT Adobe Flash 10.0 pre-release is still heads and tails better than running 32 BIT Flash 10.1. Even if it does crank my CPU temp through the roof...Besides I don't even think the Linux version of 10.1 includes hardware acceleration so I would expect similiar issues there..

I'll put up with any security issues caused by sticking to the pre-release version, because as we all know, flash isn't secure anyway. Plus I am not a moron, I don't visit untrustworthy sites.

I am glad I kept a copy of 10.0 64 BIT lying around. Its like gold dust to me now.

[Cavsfan]

Try this workaround. I only had to do step 3 for my buttons to once again work properly.

http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=9380613&postcount=2

[The Real Dave]

Great. I thought I had the latest, and any old Youtube interfaces were in-operable. Thankfully, this latest version seems better, even on 64bit Ubuntu. I just used the flashplugin-installer in the repos btw :)

EDIT: I spoke too soon >.<

[McRat]

I just installed the Flash 10 update on U32 10.04 and there is a problem.

Go to www.speedtest.net and look. Is the page flickering and dancing? Even when you are not running the test, the CPU goes 100% when viewing the page. Not good. I use that site alot.

[chriswyatt]

Do you have desktop effects on? I'm not seeing it at all.

[lovinglinux]

Great. I thought I had the latest, and any old Youtube interfaces were in-operable. Thankfully, this latest version seems better, even on 64bit Ubuntu. I just used the flashplugin-installer in the repos btw :)

EDIT: I spoke too soon >.<

To fix that you need to edit the npviewer file. Open it with the command below:


gksudo gedit /usr/lib/nspluginwrapper/i386/linux/npviewer

Then add the following line before the last line of that file:


export GDK_NATIVE_WINDOWS=1

The file content should look like this:


#!/bin/sh
TARGET_OS=linux
TARGET_ARCH=i386
export GDK_NATIVE_WINDOWS=1
. /usr/lib/nspluginwrapper/noarch/npviewer

Save the file and restart the browser.

[coolbrook]

This popped up during my updates. It could just be a name for the installer or maybe something is brewing after all.

[CharlesA]

Same version I am using.

I checked it from here: http://kb2.adobe.com/cps/155/tn_15507.html

[rajeev1204]

I love my 64 bit plugin and iam keeping it.

To hell with the security bulletins, i have an ubuntu 8.04 which has not been updated for 2 years and none of my secrets are out on the internet.And neither do i have any.

Some of you have extreme paranoia. (Smiley follows)

[CharlesA]

Isn't 8.04 supported for 3 years on the desktop?