linux-flashplugin9 Restricted?

Kitche kitche at kitchetech.com
Tue Jun 3 01:28:05 UTC 2008


> On Mon, 2 Jun 2008 18:27:07 -0500
> Derek Graham <derek.graham at att.net> wrote:
>
>> on Monday 02 June 2008Monday 02 June 2008 RW RW
>> <fbsd06 at mlists.homeunix.com> wrote:
>>
>> > On Mon, 2 Jun 2008 16:09:58 -0500
>> > Derek Graham <derek.graham at att.net> wrote:
>
>> > > I found this odd, I remember seeing an email from adobe someone
>> > > posted that said that they do not support freebsd but they do not
>> > > forbid users to use flash if they can get it working.
>> >
>> > Note that this entry is dated 2006. The flash ports were temporarily
>> > removed and then reinstated shortly after. This is not an issue, as
>> > far as I know.
> "
>> Then why do they still show up as Restricted in portfresh and ports?
>
> At lot of proprietary software is marked as RESTRICTED, in this case
> the reason is simply "Redistribution not allowed".
>
> At the time the port  was removed it was against the license to run
> the binary on any OS that wasn't officially supported.
>
>
>> 7 is almost useless anyway since most sites use 9 now, and 9 is not
>> even worth the time, flash almost is a waste of time installing :p
>
> AFAIK Flash9 relies on the Linux 2.6 kernel, and so wont run on
> FreeBSDs default of 2.4. I've not tried it, but I think people have said
> it can be made to run with 2.6 emulation.
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-ports at freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
>

Flash9 does not run with 2.6 emulation it crashes but does run for like a
second.



More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list