iB::Topic::Flash 9 environment

	Damn Small Linux :: Damn Small Linux Board The DSL Forums

» Welcome Guest
[ Log In :: Register ]

Damn Small Linux Board » Damn Small Linux » DSL Ideas and Suggestions » Flash 9 environment

		Mini-ITX Boards Sale, Fanless BareBones Mini-ITX, Bootable 1G DSL USBs, 533MHz Fanless PC <-- SALE $200 each!
		Get The Official Damn Small Linux Book. DSL Market , Great VPS hosting provided by Tektonic

Pages: (11) </ 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 ... >/

[ Track this topic :: Email this topic :: Print this topic ]

Topic: Flash 9 environment

< Next Oldest | Next Newest >

WDef

Group: Members
Posts: 798
Joined: Sep. 2005

Posted: June 01 2008,21:11

Quote

It is the regular 2.4.27-4-686 kernel that comes with Sarge

What I meant was Debian usually patch their kernels. They're not vanilla kernels. They might (?) have applied an NPTL patch, but they will have documented this somewhere so it should be possible to determine if that is so.

WDef

Group: Members
Posts: 798
Joined: Sep. 2005

Posted: June 01 2008,21:30

Done a quick google, can't find any reference to that kernel in Sarge having NPTL, seems unlikely.

That might be a red herring I think.

Hopefully you can work out what the difference between the two systems vis a vis Flash.

Building a gnash extension sounds useful though.

btw, I had a a Sarge install years ago, maybe it was a respin, but I thought I had a 2.6.xx kernel.

.

Jason W

Group: Members
Posts: 260
Joined: Nov. 2006

Posted: June 02 2008,14:54

Update:

Flash 9 works perfectly in Sarge with our 2.4.31 kernel and the gtk+-2.12.9 extension. And nspluginwrapper has nothing to do with it, flash 9.0.124 is stable without it in Sarge. And obviously NPTL/TLS is not the culprit. So the 2.6 kernel may not be so much what helps, just that 2.6 systems have mystery lib(s)/app(s) that are more up to date and are compatible with flash 9. And glibc that is built with support for 2.6 kernels only makes use of those threading features when actually running a 2.6 kernel if I read up on it right.

Flash 9 works in DSL now for some images and animations that are not streamed. Streaming video is where the heart of the problem lies. Nspluginwrapper was crashing because flash was in that circumstance. I used the Xorg/XFree extensions to no avail, so X and its libs do not seem to be the problem.

Pretty much I will update libs one at a time on a DSL HD install until I find the culprit if my hunch is correct. I will make an extension for nspluginwrapper anyway, since it is good insurance to keep Firefox from crashing like it normally would in case flash dies.

Jason W

Group: Members
Posts: 260
Joined: Nov. 2006

Posted: June 03 2008,09:29

Well, the culprit was glibc after all. I made a .dsl out of Sarge's libc6 and now I am watching youtube videos to my hearts content with flash 9.0.124 and Firefox 2.0.0.14. The glibc in Sarge is of course the same version number as in DSL (2.3.2), but with all the gazillion patches that have been applied to it by now I reckon somewhere in there was the added stuff to be compatible with the latest flash. The exact package is libc6_2.3.2.ds1-22sarge6_i386.deb. Either making it into a .dsl or simply using "dpkg --force-all -i libc6_2.3.2.ds1-22sarge6_i386.deb" works the same. It is a bit of a hack, but nothing appears to be broken by doing this. And the glibc related commands seem to work ok. I do not get any system errors with anything I do so far.
The extensions needed besides libc6 are dsl-dpkg.dsl, gnu-utils.dsl, alsa4dslv2.dsl, and one of the full size gtk2 extensions. Even though all seems well with this approach, try first with a live cd before using it on a hard drive install.

lucky13

Group: Members
Posts: 1478
Joined: Feb. 2007

Posted: June 03 2008,11:54

Quote

It is a bit of a hack, but nothing appears to be broken by doing this. And the glibc related commands seem to work ok. I do not get any system errors with anything I do so far.

I'm curious if you've tried running other things that should, might, or are already known to break against the version of glibc DSL has, such as more recent (Sarge+) apps from Debian or recent builds of GTK1 Firefox/Bon Echo from lamarelle.org.

I'm a little surprised by this -- an uncompressed difference of only ~14kb for libc itself despite a "gazillion" or however many patches it has had. This is what DSL currently has:
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 1230864 Jun 25 2005 /lib/libc-2.3.2.so
...and this is in the Sarge version you said you used:
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 1244752 Mar 5 2007 libc-2.3.2.so

Much of the rest of it is also appears to be fairly close to the same size of the DSL versions, at least what I looked at. I'll double check the sizes and play around with it more later today, maybe test on my hard drive install since I've decided to reinstall with 4.4 when it hits release anyway.

--------------
"It felt kind of like having a pitbull terrier on my rear end."
-- meo (copyright(c)2008, all rights reserved)

50 replies since Mar. 31 2008,03:21

< Next Oldest | Next Newest >

[ Track this topic :: Email this topic :: Print this topic ]

Pages: (11) </ 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 ... >/

Damn Small Linux Board » Damn Small Linux » DSL Ideas and Suggestions » Flash 9 environment