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: flash-plugin-10.2.161.23-0.1.el5.rf.x86_64 jre-1.6.0_18-fcs.x86_64 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 -> /usr/lib64/flash-plugin/libflashplayer.so lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 39 Jul 6 22:14 libnpjp2.so -> /usr/java/default/lib/amd64/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...