Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2007 17:46:30 +0100 From: RW <fbsd06@mlists.homeunix.com> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: The scandalous status of linux-flashplugin9 Message-ID: <20071008174630.665f978e@gumby.homeunix.com.> In-Reply-To: <790a9fff0710080752k90c1ac3r23856304f176648e@mail.gmail.com> References: <20071008125558.GE1509@copernic.kti.ae.poznan.pl> <790a9fff0710080752k90c1ac3r23856304f176648e@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 8 Oct 2007 09:52:18 -0500 "Scot Hetzel" <swhetzel@gmail.com> wrote: > On 10/8/07, Willy Picard <picard@kti.ae.poznan.pl> wrote: > > The thing that shocked me is the fact that the port is still in the > > ports tree > > even if it does not work! (It compiles but each try to view a Flash > > animation > > leads to a segmentation fault of Firefox). If we want the FreeBSD > > community to > > be focused on quality (I assume we all want), then this port should > > be removed > > from the ports tree or at least marked as broken. > > e the port should be marked broken for OSVERSION < 7000xx, and > compat.linux.osrelease = 2.4.2, as the flash9 plugin may require > 2.6.16 linux emulation. > No it shouldn't. I've never seen it crash a browser, and it works to a limited extent on some sites that can't be navigated without it.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20071008174630.665f978e>