On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 11:58 AM, William L. Maltby CentOS4Bill@triad.rr.com wrote: <snip>
I think you should dump that old version (if you're CentOS 5.x?) and get it updated to the 10.2 Why your plkuginreg.dat has 9 while your rpm shows 10.x, I couldn't guess.
However, mine is wrapped.
1228591673000:1:1:$ Shockwave Flash 10.0 r12:$ Shockwave Flash:$ 2 0:application/x-shockwave-flash:Shockwave Flash:swf:$ 1:application/futuresplash:FutureSplash Player:spl:$ /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins-wrapped/nswrapper_32_32.nppdf.so:$
$ rpm -qa | grep flash flash-plugin-10.0.12.36-release
Here's mine:
[lanny@dell2400 ~]$ rpm -qa | grep flash flash-plugin-10.0.12.36-2.el5.rf
Your's is from rpmforge now. I don't have experience with it, so I can't offer if that's the problem. Mine came from the adobe site, installed flawlessly and worked OOTB (Out Of The Box).
With both having the same rel/ver, I'm not sure what's different about the rpmforge version.
You have been looking into the Adobe .pdf issue with Firefox during the past few days. Do you think this problem with Flash might be related to that? Or, do I have something screwed up on my box? TIA, Lanny
Well, ATM, all I know is that the pluginreg.dat has a version that doesn't match what rpm shows. I would get those consistent first. If it were me (being comfortable with "risky behavior"), I'd uninstall the rpm, make sure plugins don't include it anymore (if not, we'll have to think since it says "don't edit") and re-install. Rpmforge is probably OK, but the adobe site would also be OK AFAICT from my experience.
Thank you for all of your ideas and suggestions. I will try to resolve this, hopefully tomorrow and I will let you know, if I got it to work properly or not. Yes, it's a CentOS 5.2 (32 bit) box.