How to get Flash Player

ohnonot · 2017-01-14 11:53:50

Head_on_a_Stick wrote:

Compare the CVE statistics, these are for vulnerabilities rated at 9/10 or higher in severity:
Google Chrome Stable: 59
Adobe Flash Player: 832
Chrome is the most secure browser available, Google spend millions every year improving it

ohnonot wrote:

or have you fallen for google's double-tongued promise: if you give us all your data, you get a secure system (browser, email provider...) in return?

of course they're spending millions on it!

edit:
and chrome still is a binary blob, as opposed to chromium.

Last edited by ohnonot (2017-01-14 11:55:22)

nore · 2017-01-14 14:53:55

All right, at least one can choose either one of the two evils. They both seem to work in this case; here's today's Kaleva in Chrome:

What's the technical difference between using Chrome with builtin pepperflash or Firefox with browser-plugin-freshplayer-pepperflash maintained by Google?

This is not an ideological issue for me, personally, I've already sold my soul to Google AND use Adobe Flash for newspaper reading; I'm just curious. I've always been weak in faith for the Great Gnu.

Last edited by nore (2017-01-14 14:55:20)

Head_on_a_Stick · 2017-01-14 15:02:02

nore wrote:

What's the techical difference between using Chrome with builtin pepperflash or Firefox with browser-plugin-freshplayer-pepperflash maintained by Google?

Theoretically, not much because libpepflashplayer.so is extracted from a downloaded copy of Google Chrome Stable

However, there have been issues with the various Debian FlashPlayer packages (this is why johnraff developed the bunsen-pepperflash package and also why MX are using that package as well) and the Google Chrome Stable plugin will *always* be updated before the Debian repository equivalent.

For the record, I have had at least one site completely refuse to work with any FlashPlayer except Google Chrome Stable, all other versions (chromium, firefox-esr, Firefox from Mozilla, NPAPI and PPAPI) would display a "Flash version is too old" error message despite the version number being current and verified as up-to-date on this page.

Finally, to be absolutely clear, I *do not* recommend using either Google Chrome Stable or FlashPlayer, but if you *need* to view the content then they are the most effective way of doing so.

Head_on_a_Stick · 2017-01-14 15:21:34

Head_on_a_Stick wrote:

libpepflashplayer.so is extracted from a downloaded copy of Google Chrome Stable

Not any more:

https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugrepo … bug=841373

EDIT: and https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugrepo … bug=833741

Last edited by Head_on_a_Stick (2017-01-14 15:23:20)

Head_on_a_Stick · 2017-01-14 15:44:57

With apologies for the multiple posts...

I can confirm that error on my new stretch-based BL system:

mv: cannot stat 'unpackchrome/opt/google/chrome/PepperFlash/libpepflashplayer.so': No such file or directory

Although, strangely, the plugin then shows up but at version 11.blah

Scrot alongside Chrome:

Note also that Google Chrome Stable is a newer version than the Debian chromium package.

https://packages.debian.org/search?keyw … ection=all

johnraff · 2017-01-15 02:02:25

nore wrote:

What's the technical difference between using Chrome with builtin pepperflash or Firefox with browser-plugin-freshplayer-pepperflash maintained by Google?

browser-plugin-freshplayer-pepperflash is not maintained by Google. It's an open-source wrapper that enables NPAPI apps like Firefox to use PPAPI plugins like the Adobe (not Google) pepperflash library.

Chromium can use the PPAPI flash plugin directly, but Firefox needs the above wrapper.

Google Chrome comes with the flash plugin already installed.

Last edited by johnraff (2017-01-15 02:03:24)

johnraff · 2017-01-15 02:14:25

Head_on_a_Stick wrote:

libpepflashplayer.so is extracted from a downloaded copy of Google Chrome Stable

This was true of pepperflashplugin-nonfree (but no longer, as you point out), but BL's bunsen-pepperflash gets libpepflashplayer.so directly from Adobe (not Google).

the Google Chrome Stable plugin will *always* be updated before the Debian repository equivalent.

But not any sooner than the direct Adobe download (via bunsen-pepperflash) of course.

I have had at least one site completely refuse to work with any FlashPlayer except Google Chrome Stable, all other versions (chromium, firefox-esr, Firefox from Mozilla, NPAPI and PPAPI) would display a "Flash version is too old" error message.

That page looks OK to me on Firefox. What do you have to do to see that error message? I didn't sign up, but the video demos played OK (they don't seem to be flash though).

Finally, to be absolutely clear, I *do not* recommend using either Google Chrome Stable or FlashPlayer, but if you *need* to view the content then they are the most effective way of doing so.

"most effective"? Not sure what you mean. Security wise, I'd have thought Chromium+pepperflash, convenience wise, Firefox+wrapper+pepperflash. Peoples' tastes vary of course...

Last edited by johnraff (2017-01-15 02:17:58)

Head_on_a_Stick · 2017-01-15 02:16:08

johnraff wrote:

What do you have to do to see that error message?

Log in and attempt to take the lesson.

"most effective"? Not sure what you mean.

See my answer immediately above.

johnraff · 2017-01-15 02:25:21

Head_on_a_Stick wrote:

johnraff wrote:
What do you have to do to see that error message?
Log in and attempt to take the lesson.

You mean sign up for a free 10 day guest pass? Filling in my parents' names too, and a lot of lies about my school level? Sigh... haven't you got anything easier to test with?

"most effective"? Not sure what you mean.
See my answer immediately above.

You mean that error message you got when trying to use the Debian package? Why aren't you using bunsen-pepperflash?

ohnonot · 2017-01-15 07:45:48

This is not an ideological issue for me, personally, I've already sold my soul to Google (...) I've always been weak in faith for the Great Gnu.

just for the record, i deeply resent comments like this.

it is not an ideology; what google does is very real. they are not the only one's, but i think it is safe to say that they are the biggest ones.
they have about a dozen irons in the fire, each of them enabling them to collect more data (that can be capitalized very profitably), and they can put it all together (creating nice profiles for computer users, across devices) and most certainly they do.
that is the only reason why they are throwing high quality, actively maintained apps onto the market for free.
i for one will not actively help them.

this has nothing to do with linux, or the "faith for the great gnu".
it has something to do with being able to choose alternatives.

i cannot understand how a forum moderator of a distro that prides itself to be close to pure debian can so off-handedly recommend installing a binary blob by google inc. - and instead of taking a step back, continues to sing its praise in his/her defense.

johnraff, thank you for taking a more technical view on HoaS' comments.

Last edited by ohnonot (2017-01-15 08:10:56)

nore · 2017-01-15 09:25:23

johnraff: thank you for clarification. So, I should be able to replace flashplugin-nonfree with browser-plugin-freshplayer-pepperflash and it would look just the same? My sticking with nonfree player is just an old habit from Crunchbang days, I didn't believe those other players would do the job. It's good to see some progress happening.

Four or more years ago the my daily newspaper delivered facsimiles on HTML+JPEG. It was so easy to read them on any browser and any platform. Then the business concern decided to move all their papers on a Flash-based platform. One can't read them on a phone or tablet by browser, one must install a dedicated app. On a computer (which I prefer for usability), one must have a flashplayer.

ohnonot: Apparently I should learn to use those damned smilies. "Sold my soul" means I've actively chosen to pay for a service by immaterial property. I choose what I give away. That's why I use Chrome at work and FF for leisure.

ohnonot wrote:

[it has something to do with being able to choose alternatives.

In this case (reading facsimile editions), there are no real alternatives. If there was, I would choose not to use Flash at all. How long have we been waiting for Flash to die permanently? Ten years?

fossiili: how is Antix kicking? Sorry for totally cluttering your thead, but you raised an important issue.

Head_on_a_Stick · 2017-01-15 10:59:39

johnraff wrote:

You mean that error message you got when trying to use the Debian package?

Yes.

johnraff wrote:

Why aren't you using bunsen-pepperflash?

I already am

ohnonot wrote:

a distro that prides itself to be close to pure debian

Personally, I do not consider this distribution to be "close to pure Debian", it is already blob-ridden and, as such, I consider it to be beyond redemption.

I would urge all users with any interest in software freedom (as in speech) to install pure Debian instead.

EDIT: changed my mind about "beyond redemption":

https://forums.bunsenlabs.org/viewtopic.php?id=3226

O:)

Last edited by Head_on_a_Stick (2017-01-15 16:56:55)

johnraff · 2017-01-16 02:52:30

Head_on_a_Stick wrote:

johnraff wrote:
You mean that error message you got when trying to use the Debian package?
Yes.
johnraff wrote:
Why aren't you using bunsen-pepperflash?
I already am

This means you have found a bug with bunsen-pepperflash? I would greatly appreciate it if you could start a new thread with some info on how to reproduce the error (I get none). Such bug reports are always welcome!

johnraff · 2017-01-16 03:03:02

nore wrote:

So, I should be able to replace flashplugin-nonfree with browser-plugin-freshplayer-pepperflash and it would look just the same? My sticking with nonfree player is just an old habit from Crunchbang days, I didn't believe those other players would do the job.

To use flash with Firefox you need to install either

1) flashplugin-nonfree
or
2) browser-plugin-freshplayer-pepperflash + bunsen-pepperflash

1) will use the native, but older, NPAPI interface, while 2) uses the newer PPAPI interface.

While all the packages mentioned above are themselves free and open-source, they all ultimately download and use a non-free, closed-source binary blob from Adobe. That's unavoidable if you want to use Flash.
(There was an open-source attempt to reverse-engineer Flash, called Gnash, but I don't think it ever worked.)

Head_on_a_Stick · 2017-01-16 18:37:40

johnraff wrote:

This means you have found a bug with bunsen-pepperflash?

I don't think there is a problem with your package, the plugin is installed correctly and picked up by chromium (and firefox-esr with the freshplayer wrapper) and most FlashPlayer sites work fine, it has had plenty of testing in this regard.

The aforementioned site is the only one (that I can think of at the moment) that I have had problems with and it is unique in requiring registration, making me think that this issue is related to DRM. Of course I could be completely wrong about this

Google Chrome Stable works fine, hence my recommendation to use it.

I just tried again on my jessie laptop with the 24.0.194 Flash version with the same result.

Chromium (both windows):

[redacted]

Chromium on the right hand side, Google Chrome Stable on the left:

[redacted]

Also, Netflix won't work in jessie without Google Chrome Stable, although Firefox should have Widevine support by the time stretch goes stable.

EDIT: I should probably note that Chrome is only used for Mathletics, x-www-browser is chromium 8)

Last edited by Head_on_a_Stick (2017-01-17 09:10:44)

johnraff · 2017-01-17 02:45:17

Seems to be working OK for me with Firefox:

Head_on_a_Stick · 2017-01-17 07:18:51

In which case I can only presume that it is related to my location.

fossiili · 2017-01-17 13:12:41

Thank you all for this interesting discussion

Meanwhile I changed to Antix Linux. But my trash can PC was too difficult for Antic and I installed Bunsen Labs again. I meat many problems so it is best I start a completely new discussion. Ans stop here. Se you

fossiili · 2017-03-06 13:42:05

fossiili wrote:

Thank you all for this interesting discussion
Meanwhile I changed to Antix Linux. But my trash can PC was too difficult for Antic and I installed Bunsen Labs again. I meat many problems so it is best I start a completely new discussion. Ans stop here. Se you

Hello again!

My project with BunsenLabs Linux continues in another computer than previously. It's a bit younger than the IBM NetVista and works better. I had in it Linux Mint with Mate desktop and I liked it.

But now I try to give this computer to a frend of mine. And Mint with Mate was a bit too slow for her. So I installed BunsenLabs to this pc also. And I face the same problems with Flash Player as earlyer. I can not read the facsimile version of my local newspaper.

I am sorry but I am 82 and recently I'm recovering from cerebral hemorrhage so I'm not in my best kondition. So all the discussion is interesting to read, but I hope to clarify my situation.

As Moderator sead:

The simplest solution for full Flash support in BunsenLabs is to install and use Google Chrome Stable,
there is a menu entry for this.

This will do well becouse she (my frend) already uses Chrome in WindowsXP.

BUT: Where are the mentioned meny entries 8)
Those mentioned in this diccussions

hhh · 2017-03-06 14:21:46

Should be under "WWW Browsers>Install>Google Chrome" or similar.

#21 2017-01-14 11:53:50

Re: How to get Flash Player

#22 2017-01-14 14:53:55

Re: How to get Flash Player

#23 2017-01-14 15:02:02

Re: How to get Flash Player

#24 2017-01-14 15:21:34

Re: How to get Flash Player

#25 2017-01-14 15:44:57

Re: How to get Flash Player

#26 2017-01-15 02:02:25

Re: How to get Flash Player

#27 2017-01-15 02:14:25

Re: How to get Flash Player

#28 2017-01-15 02:16:08

Re: How to get Flash Player

#29 2017-01-15 02:25:21

Re: How to get Flash Player

#30 2017-01-15 07:45:48

Re: How to get Flash Player

#31 2017-01-15 09:25:23

Re: How to get Flash Player

#32 2017-01-15 10:59:39

Re: How to get Flash Player

#33 2017-01-16 02:52:30

Re: How to get Flash Player

#34 2017-01-16 03:03:02

Re: How to get Flash Player

#35 2017-01-16 18:37:40

Re: How to get Flash Player

#36 2017-01-17 02:45:17

Re: How to get Flash Player

#37 2017-01-17 07:18:51

Re: How to get Flash Player

#38 2017-01-17 13:12:41

Re: How to get Flash Player

#39 2017-03-06 13:42:05

Re: How to get Flash Player

#40 2017-03-06 14:21:46

Re: How to get Flash Player

Board footer