[arch-multilib] Renaming flashplugin
Hi all, what do you think about renaming flashplugin to lib32-flashplugin? This would be consistent with the other packages names and would enable us to provide the x86_64 version as flashplugin. Greetings, Pierre -- Pierre Schmitz, https://users.archlinux.de/~pierre
On 10/24/2010 12:00 PM, Pierre Schmitz wrote:
Hi all,
what do you think about renaming flashplugin to lib32-flashplugin? This would be consistent with the other packages names and would enable us to provide the x86_64 version as flashplugin.
Greetings,
Pierre
proving now a native x86_64 is not the case. Maybe when 10.2 became stable for i686. when this is happening, the update from flashplugin from multilib to a native is smooth and whoever still prefers the lib32, he can install it -- Ionuț
On 10/24/2010 12:02 PM, Ionuț Bîru wrote:
On 10/24/2010 12:00 PM, Pierre Schmitz wrote:
Hi all,
what do you think about renaming flashplugin to lib32-flashplugin? This would be consistent with the other packages names and would enable us to provide the x86_64 version as flashplugin.
Greetings,
Pierre
proving now a native x86_64 is not the case. Maybe when 10.2 became stable for i686. when this is happening, the update from flashplugin from multilib to a native is smooth and whoever still prefers the lib32, he can install it
proving/moving, slow morning... -- Ionuț
Am 24.10.2010 11:00, schrieb Pierre Schmitz:
Hi all,
what do you think about renaming flashplugin to lib32-flashplugin? This would be consistent with the other packages names and would enable us to provide the x86_64 version as flashplugin.
Greetings,
Pierre
In my mind, there is the following game plan: 1) Wait until the "square" flashplayer becomes a stable release. 2) Rename multilib/flashplugin to multilib/flashplugin-nspluginwrapper 3) Provide the native plugin as "flashplugin"
On Sun, 24 Oct 2010 11:38:09 +0200, Thomas Bächler
Am 24.10.2010 11:00, schrieb Pierre Schmitz:
Hi all,
what do you think about renaming flashplugin to lib32-flashplugin? This would be consistent with the other packages names and would enable us to provide the x86_64 version as flashplugin.
Greetings,
Pierre
In my mind, there is the following game plan:
1) Wait until the "square" flashplayer becomes a stable release. 2) Rename multilib/flashplugin to multilib/flashplugin-nspluginwrapper 3) Provide the native plugin as "flashplugin"
That's what I wanted to say. Not moving in the prerelease now, but preparing it with renaming the nspluginwrapper package. Btw: if you surf to the http://get.adobe.com/de/flashplayer/ it already recommends the prerelease for x86_64. Let's hope they keep supporting it for now. -- Pierre Schmitz, https://users.archlinux.de/~pierre
Am 24.10.2010 11:51, schrieb Pierre Schmitz:
That's what I wanted to say. Not moving in the prerelease now, but preparing it with renaming the nspluginwrapper package. Btw: if you surf to the http://get.adobe.com/de/flashplayer/ it already recommends the prerelease for x86_64. Let's hope they keep supporting it for now.
For a smooth support, install and upgrade procedure, I would do the renaming at the same time as moving in the native plugin. And I won't believe continued 64 bit support from Adobe until they start shipping it as a stable release. I hope they'll keep supporting it now, as they also started supporting the more popular Windows and OS X platforms this time. But we'll see what happens.
Am Sun, 24 Oct 2010 11:58:46 +0200
schrieb Thomas Bächler
For a smooth support, install and upgrade procedure, I would do the renaming at the same time as moving in the native plugin. And I won't believe continued 64 bit support from Adobe until they start shipping it as a stable release.
Was the previous native 64 bit version every stable? As far as I know it was not. Is Flash stable at all? I second Pierre's suggestion. This way everyone who wants the "stable" 32 bit Flash can install lib32-flashplugin or bin32-flashplugin and everyone who wants the native 64 bit pre version can install flashplugin. Except there are serious instabilities, bugs or vulnerabilities. In this case the pre version should of course not be provided. But I'd choose one of the names lib32-flashplugin or bin32-flashplugin over flashplugin-nspluginwrapper because it's clearer and says what it's for. Notwithstanding the above, I think the package in [multilib] should be renamed. A package name without an appendix like lib32- is usually meant to be a native package for the corresponding architecture. Heiko
participants (4)
-
Heiko Baums
-
Ionuț Bîru
-
Pierre Schmitz
-
Thomas Bächler