[CentOS] firefox. java. 64 bit. bleah!

Mon Nov 22 18:24:15 UTC 2010
Nicolas Thierry-Mieg <Nicolas.Thierry-Mieg at imag.fr>

Lars Hecking wrote:
> Nicolas Thierry-Mieg writes:
>> nspluginwrapper is for running 32-bit plugins in a 64-bit browser. Now
>> that we have functional 64-bit flash and java plugins I don't see the
>> need, but YMMV.
>   We do not have a functional 64-bit flash plugin, and no 64-bit adobe plugin,
>   so we need the wrapper for those.
>   I've done some systematic testing this morning. If you don't want to read
>   everything below, the summary is that on an x86_64 system, only the 64-bit
>   java plugin works, and the 32-bit plugin crashes. This means that the only
>   working setup on x86_64 is firefox + java plugin x86_64, nspluginwrapper
>   plus Adobe + flash 32-bit plugins. The brave may try the beta 64-bit flash
>   plugin.

the beta x86_64 flash plugin is what I was referring to. I've been using 
it for a while (from rpmforge) and it works well for me.

my setup, which works fine on several systems with different hardware, 
is pure x86_64. No nspluginwrapper, I dropped that when the 64-bit flash 
plugin was satisfactory for me. On the system I'm writing from I have:

I don't use the acrobat plugin, I usually open pdfs with evince. I also 
only activate java on a few specific sites (yes I know I should update it).

[nthierry at localhost ~]$ l /usr/lib64/mozilla/plugins/
total 0
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 41 Nov 17 08:48 libflashplayer.so -> 
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 39 Jul  6 22:14 libnpjp2.so -> 

I use seamonkey (x86_64) rather than firefox, but I just tested both 
java (at www.javatester.org) and flash (youtube) in firefox x86_64 and 
they both work.

But as I said, YMMV...