You are not logged in.

#1 2008-02-07 22:46:50

JaDa
Member
From: Sun City, CA (native German)
Registered: 2007-04-06
Posts: 210
Website

Update 02/07/08 MessUp [solved]

thank's guys for your nice breakage of packages sad yikes

Starting with Firefox and Flash. Well after Update to firefox 2.0.0.11-2 the flashplugin 9.0.115.0-2 doesn't work anymore.

and take a look here
http://releases.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla … /2.0.0.12/

I don't understand why you update a FF 2.0.0.11-2 because the FF 2.0.0.12 is avaible. The same also with seamonkey
http://releases.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla … ses/1.1.8/ roll

gcc

gcc 4.2.3-1, gcc-gcj 4.2.3-1 conflicts with gcc-fortran. I need to remove several packages first.

:: lapack: requires gcc-fortran
:: octave: requires gcc-fortran>=4.2.0
:: python-numpy: requires gcc-fortran
:: r: requires gcc-fortran>=4.2.0
:: scilab: requires gcc-fortran

gcc-libs provides now gcc-fortran , cool!

Now I try to reinstall

[root@arch-01 jada]# pacman -S lapack octave python-numpy r scilab
resolving dependencies...
error: cannot resolve "gcc-fortran>=4.2.0", a dependency of "lapack"
error: failed to prepare transaction (could not satisfy dependencies)
:: lapack: requires gcc-fortran>=4.2.0
[root@arch-01 jada]# pacman -S octave
resolving dependencies...
error: cannot resolve "gcc-fortran>=4.2.0", a dependency of "octave"
error: failed to prepare transaction (could not satisfy dependencies)
:: octave: requires gcc-fortran>=4.2.0
[root@arch-01 jada]#

However, I am angry guys .......... I am very angry ......... sad

Last edited by JaDa (2008-02-09 01:46:16)


openSUSE
Arch Linux
USALUG

Offline

#2 2008-02-07 23:20:13

Allan
is always right
From: Brisbane, AU
Registered: 2007-06-09
Posts: 10,465
Website

Re: Update 02/07/08 MessUp [solved]

I had no problems with the gcc upgrade.  Just got asked "Replace gcc-fortran with core/gcc? [Y/n]" and all went smoothly. (gcc-libs-4.2.3-2, gcc-4.2.3-1)

Haven't tested yet but I am surprised about the firefox/flashplugin issue as these were in testing for a very long time.  Hence the reason firefox is out of date already.

Last edited by Allan (2008-02-07 23:24:21)

Offline

#3 2008-02-07 23:31:57

JaDa
Member
From: Sun City, CA (native German)
Registered: 2007-04-06
Posts: 210
Website

Re: Update 02/07/08 MessUp [solved]

Allan wrote:

I had no problems with the gcc upgrade.  Just got asked "Replace gcc-fortran with core/gcc? [Y/n]" and all went smoothly. (gcc-libs-4.2.3-2, gcc-4.2.3-1)

Haven't tested yet but I am surprised about the firefox/flashplugin issue as these were in testing for a very long time.  Hence the reason firefox is out of date already.

The developmer wrote me

Ok, seems I've been caught by the usual pacman behavior again:

[root@server jan]# pacman -S r
resolving dependencies...
error: cannot resolve "gcc-fortran>=4.2.0", a dependency of "lapack"
error: failed to prepare transaction (could not satisfy dependencies)
:: lapack: requires gcc-fortran>=4.2.0

I'll build a fixed gcc-libs tomorrow. In the meanwhile, you could pacman
-Rd gcc-fortran and install the new gcc and/or gcc-libs. To satisfy
dependencies for packages that want versioned fortran, you can
edit /var/lib/pacman/local/gcc-libs-4.2.3-2/depends and change these
lines:
%PROVIDES%
gcc-fortran=4.2.3
gcc-objc=4.2.3

a fix is in process big_smile


openSUSE
Arch Linux
USALUG

Offline

#4 2008-02-08 00:31:21

dolby
Member
From: 1992
Registered: 2006-08-08
Posts: 1,581

Re: Update 02/07/08 MessUp [solved]

may i ask if you only use Archlinux for doing the occasional upgrades of packages and not as a full time OS without being considered as a flame?
I am only asking cause reading other posts of yours as well in these fora i get the idea you seem not to understand how Archlinux packaging works at all. Even after almost a year of use.

Last edited by dolby (2008-02-08 00:31:51)


There shouldn't be any reason to learn more editor types than emacs or vi -- mg (1)
[You learn that sarcasm does not often work well in international forums.  That is why we avoid it. -- ewaller (arch linux forum moderator)

Offline

#5 2008-02-08 01:41:50

kensai
Member
From: Puerto Rico
Registered: 2005-06-03
Posts: 2,475
Website

Re: Update 02/07/08 MessUp [solved]

JaDa wrote:

thank's [sic] guys for your nice breakage of packages

Look, he is just thanking us, yeah, you are welcome. Oh, and a typo there, see "[sic]" above, I added it, sorry couldn't help it.

Last edited by kensai (2008-02-08 01:43:38)


Follow me in: Identi.ca, Twitter, Google+

Offline

#6 2008-02-08 02:27:26

Misfit138
Misfit Emeritus
From: USA
Registered: 2006-11-27
Posts: 4,170

Re: Update 02/07/08 MessUp [solved]

Just keep in mind that Arch is a bleeding-edge rolling release. wink

Offline

#7 2008-02-08 03:28:59

JaDa
Member
From: Sun City, CA (native German)
Registered: 2007-04-06
Posts: 210
Website

Re: Update 02/07/08 MessUp [solved]

dolby wrote:

may i ask if you only use Archlinux for doing the occasional upgrades of packages and not as a full time OS without being considered as a flame?
I am only asking cause reading other posts of yours as well in these fora i get the idea you seem not to understand how Archlinux packaging works at all. Even after almost a year of use.

well, you can ask me smile

so let me answer your questions.

First I am using Archlinux on differant computers, and not all will be update right by the way. My test computers get right by the way the updates, when ever a update is avaible.

This topic post is not a flame, it is a warning!

but I forgot something, geeks have no or low sence for irony smile

At the same time I wrote this posting, a email was going to the developmer from this package. This works sometime faster then the bug report. I see the new fixed gcc-libs 4.2.3-3 was out few hours later. Is this so bad wink

My main computers are for daily use. My wife, familie all using the Archbox for there school, university and office work and another openSUSE 10.3 set up for a game box. Around there standing several testboxes with FreeBSD, Debian, Suse, MacOS and Windows. The mainboxArchlinux must be stable, because I don't want to hear all time from my wife or kids, why is ths not working anymore? big_smile

Yes, most of my postings in the forum are related to updates. Well I don't use this forum for small talk.

The problem with gcc is fixed, and the problem with Firefox and Flash are still there. I just got the mail from Dale how ask me what is not working with Firefox. Let's see .......... wink


openSUSE
Arch Linux
USALUG

Offline

#8 2008-02-08 04:00:45

elgatofelix
Member
From: Chile
Registered: 2007-07-03
Posts: 137

Re: Update 02/07/08 MessUp [solved]

Archlinux: A simple, lightweight linux distribution that breaks after pacman -Syu


Are u listening?

Offline

#9 2008-02-08 04:58:38

yabbadabbadont
Member
Registered: 2008-01-19
Posts: 22

Re: Update 02/07/08 MessUp [solved]

I updated earlier this morning and received several updates.  I just ran it again, since the gcc related packages are apparently fixed.  Here is the result:

/root # pacman -Syu
:: Synchronizing package databases...
 core                      23.2K   75.8K/s 00:00:00 [####################################################################################################] 100%
 extra                    310.7K   79.7K/s 00:00:04 [####################################################################################################] 100%
 community                341.0K   74.7K/s 00:00:05 [####################################################################################################] 100%
:: Starting full system upgrade...
warning: coreutils: local (6.10-1) is newer than core (6.9-4)
warning: fakeroot: local (1.9.2-1) is newer than core (1.9-1)
warning: firefox: local (2.0.0.11-2) is newer than extra (2.0.0.11-1)
warning: gcc: local (4.2.3-1) is newer than core (4.2.2-4)
warning: gcc-libs: local (4.2.3-2) is newer than core (4.2.2-3)
warning: libtool: local (1.5.26-1) is newer than core (1.5.24-3)
warning: man-pages: local (2.77-1) is newer than core (2.74-1)
warning: mesa: local (7.0.3rc1-1) is newer than extra (7.0.1-1)
warning: mpfr: local (2.3.1-1) is newer than extra (2.3.0-1)
warning: xorg-server: local (1.4.0.90-6) is newer than extra (1.4.0.90-5)
 local database is up to date

Very curious...

(I used the primary server for both updates, by the way.)

Offline

#10 2008-02-08 05:33:59

Allan
is always right
From: Brisbane, AU
Registered: 2007-06-09
Posts: 10,465
Website

Re: Update 02/07/08 MessUp [solved]

yabbadabbadont: Did you use the same server both times?  It appear the server used the second time has not synced the updates yet.

Edit: just noticed that you did use the same server... very strange?

Last edited by Allan (2008-02-08 05:46:44)

Offline

#11 2008-02-08 05:52:34

jacko
Member
Registered: 2007-11-23
Posts: 840

Re: Update 02/07/08 MessUp [solved]

yabbadabbadont wrote:

I updated earlier this morning and received several updates.  I just ran it again, since the gcc related packages are apparently fixed.  Here is the result:

/root # pacman -Syu
:: Synchronizing package databases...
 core                      23.2K   75.8K/s 00:00:00 [####################################################################################################] 100%
 extra                    310.7K   79.7K/s 00:00:04 [####################################################################################################] 100%
 community                341.0K   74.7K/s 00:00:05 [####################################################################################################] 100%
:: Starting full system upgrade...
warning: coreutils: local (6.10-1) is newer than core (6.9-4)
warning: fakeroot: local (1.9.2-1) is newer than core (1.9-1)
warning: firefox: local (2.0.0.11-2) is newer than extra (2.0.0.11-1)
warning: gcc: local (4.2.3-1) is newer than core (4.2.2-4)
warning: gcc-libs: local (4.2.3-2) is newer than core (4.2.2-3)
warning: libtool: local (1.5.26-1) is newer than core (1.5.24-3)
warning: man-pages: local (2.77-1) is newer than core (2.74-1)
warning: mesa: local (7.0.3rc1-1) is newer than extra (7.0.1-1)
warning: mpfr: local (2.3.1-1) is newer than extra (2.3.0-1)
warning: xorg-server: local (1.4.0.90-6) is newer than extra (1.4.0.90-5)
 local database is up to date

Very curious...

(I used the primary server for both updates, by the way.)

do you some how have testing enabled and then turned it off recently, only way I know to get that warning if u used same mirror.

Offline

#12 2008-02-08 06:31:58

yabbadabbadont
Member
Registered: 2008-01-19
Posts: 22

Re: Update 02/07/08 MessUp [solved]

Nope.  Just core, extra, and community.  I'm using the primary server for all updates.

Server = ftp://ftp.archlinux.org/$repo/os/i686

Not a big deal really.  I'll sync it again tomorrow (today I guess, since it is after midnight smile) and see what happens.

Edit: I just ran the update again.  All three were updated again, but no problems this time.  (nothing to be updated either)  I figure that I just happened to have hit the repos while they were doing something to them.  It used to happen now and then with the portage tree on Gentoo too.  Same solution as well.  Wait a while and run the sync again.  smile

Last edited by yabbadabbadont (2008-02-08 06:46:28)

Offline

#13 2008-02-08 07:00:55

bionnaki
Member
Registered: 2006-09-05
Posts: 289

Re: Update 02/07/08 MessUp [solved]

I updated & everything works fine.

Offline

#14 2008-02-08 08:13:27

bangkok_manouel
Member
From: indicates a starting point
Registered: 2005-02-07
Posts: 1,554

Re: Update 02/07/08 MessUp [solved]

yabbadabbadont wrote:

Nope.  Just core, extra, and community.  I'm using the primary server for all updates.

Server = ftp://ftp.archlinux.org/$repo/os/i686

Not a big deal really.  I'll sync it again tomorrow (today I guess, since it is after midnight smile) and see what happens.

Edit: I just ran the update again.  All three were updated again, but no problems this time.  (nothing to be updated either)  I figure that I just happened to have hit the repos while they were doing something to them.  It used to happen now and then with the portage tree on Gentoo too.  Same solution as well.  Wait a while and run the sync again.  smile

Beginners Guide wrote:

Pacman-Mirror

Choose a mirror repository for pacman.

    * archlinux.org is throttled, limiting downloads to 50KB/s


All design goals must be phrased in such a way that it is hard to use them as slogans to justify stupidity.

Offline

#15 2008-02-08 13:07:35

Cerebral
Forum Fellow
From: Waterloo, ON, CA
Registered: 2005-04-08
Posts: 3,108
Website

Re: Update 02/07/08 MessUp [solved]

yabbadabbadont wrote:

Nope.  Just core, extra, and community.  I'm using the primary server for all updates.

ftp.archlinux.org is not the "primary server" - it's a mirror, just like every other mirror.  It has every chance of being just as out-of-date as any other mirror in the list.

Offline

#16 2008-02-08 14:36:26

dolby
Member
From: 1992
Registered: 2006-08-08
Posts: 1,581

Re: Update 02/07/08 MessUp [solved]

JaDa wrote:
dolby wrote:

may i ask if you only use Archlinux for doing the occasional upgrades of packages and not as a full time OS without being considered as a flame?
I am only asking cause reading other posts of yours as well in these fora i get the idea you seem not to understand how Archlinux packaging works at all. Even after almost a year of use.

The problem with gcc is fixed, and the problem with Firefox and Flash are still there. I just got the mail from Dale how ask me what is not working with Firefox. Let's see .......... wink

There was nothing wrong with firefox to justify the -2nd build. It just moved to /usr. And in order to build the new one that package needed to go to extra from testing first. Flash works 100% ok here.
Most of the questions you ask in the fora could be easily answered, as well as maintaining a "more stabler" system if you followed development just a bit. ut with all these distros and OS's maybe it would be impossible to do so for all. I would recommend reading the arch0devel-public mailing list.IMO at least Arch requires that as its a distribution which constantly evolves and hasnt reached a certain level of maturity yet. But since phrakture took over things are betting much better very fast.

Last edited by dolby (2008-02-08 14:38:36)


There shouldn't be any reason to learn more editor types than emacs or vi -- mg (1)
[You learn that sarcasm does not often work well in international forums.  That is why we avoid it. -- ewaller (arch linux forum moderator)

Offline

#17 2008-02-08 19:42:20

JaDa
Member
From: Sun City, CA (native German)
Registered: 2007-04-06
Posts: 210
Website

Re: Update 02/07/08 MessUp [solved]

well after I read this tread
http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?pid=327826

On my testbox it looks like this

/opt/mozilla/lib/plugins:/usr/lib/mozilla/plugins
/usr/lib/firefox-2.0.0.11/plugins

/usr/lib/mozilla/plugins

I try to find a work around for my Problems Firefox with Flash. All plugin's are in the folder /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins/ ! I found out that also seamonkey in seamonkey the flashplugin 9.0.115.0-2 doesn't work!

Have anybody a idea or a solution for this problem?   smile

pkgname=firefox
pkgver=2.0.0.11
pkgrel=3
pkgdesc="Standalone web browser from mozilla.org"
arch=(i686 x86_64)
license=('MPL' 'GPL' 'LGPL')
depends=('gtk2>=2.12.0' 'pango>=1.16.1' 'gcc-libs' 'libxt' 'libidl2' 'mozilla-common' 'nss>=3.11.7' 'desktop-file-utils')
makedepends=('zip' 'imagemagick' 'pkgconfig' 'gcc' 'diffutils')
replaces=('mozilla-firebird' 'phoenix' 'mozilla-firefox')
conflicts=('mozilla-firefox')
provides=('mozilla-firefox')
install=firefox.install
url="http://www.mozilla.org/projects/firefox"
source=(ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/${pkgname}/releases/${pkgver}/source/${pkgname}-${pkgver}-source.tar.bz2
        mozconfig
           launcher.patch
    mozilla-firefox-1.0-lang.patch
        moz310924.patch
    moz325644.patch
    firefox-visibility.patch
    firefox-1.5-new-gtkim.patch
    firefox-1.5-pango-cursor-position.patch
    firefox-2.0-add-ldflags.patch
    firefox-2.0-buildversion.patch
        firefox-2.0-pango-ligatures.patch
        firefox-1.5-pango-underline.patch
        firefox-1.5-pango-justified-range.patch
        firefox-1.5-xft-rangewidth.patch
    firefox-2.0-pango-printing.patch
        firefox.desktop
    firefox-safe.desktop)
options=('!makeflags')

build() {
  cd ${startdir}/src/mozilla
  patch -Np0 -i ${startdir}/src/moz310924.patch || return 1
  patch -Np0 -i ${startdir}/src/moz325644.patch || return 1
  patch -Np0 -i ${startdir}/src/launcher.patch || return 1
  patch -Np1 -i ${startdir}/src/mozilla-firefox-1.0-lang.patch || return 1
  patch -Np1 -i ${startdir}/src/firefox-1.5-new-gtkim.patch || return 1
  patch -Np1 -i ${startdir}/src/firefox-1.5-pango-cursor-position.patch || return 1
  patch -Np0 -i ${startdir}/src/firefox-2.0-add-ldflags.patch || return 1
  patch -Np0 -i ${startdir}/src/firefox-2.0-buildversion.patch || return 1
  patch -Np1 -i ${startdir}/src/firefox-2.0-pango-ligatures.patch || return 1
  patch -Np1 -i ${startdir}/src/firefox-1.5-pango-underline.patch || return 1
  patch -Np1 -i ${startdir}/src/firefox-1.5-pango-justified-range.patch || return 1
  patch -Np1 -i ${startdir}/src/firefox-1.5-xft-rangewidth.patch || return 1
  patch -Np0 -i ${startdir}/src/firefox-2.0-pango-printing.patch || return 1

  if [ "$CARCH" = "x86_64" ]; then
    patch -Np0 -i ../firefox-visibility.patch || return 1
  fi

  export MOZ_PROJECT=browser

  sed "s/#CFLAGS#/${CFLAGS}/g" ${startdir}/src/mozconfig >.mozconfig
  make -f client.mk build || return 1
  make DESTDIR=${startdir}/pkg install || return 1

  cd ${startdir}/pkg/opt/mozilla/lib/firefox-${pkgver}
  export MOZ_DISABLE_GNOME=1
  export MOZTMP=`mktemp -d -p ${startdir}/src`
  LD_LIBRARY_PATH=`pwd` HOME=${MOZTMP} ./firefox-bin -register
  rm -rf ${MOZTMP}
  cd chrome
  find . -maxdepth 1 -type d -exec rm -rf {} \;

  #Remove mozilla devel stuff, this is in XULRunner now
  rm -rf ${startdir}/pkg/opt/mozilla/share
  rm -rf ${startdir}/pkg/opt/mozilla/include
  rm -rf ${startdir}/pkg/opt/mozilla/lib/pkgconfig


  cd ${startdir}/pkg/opt/mozilla/lib && ln -sf firefox-${pkgver} firefox

  rm -rf ${startdir}/pkg/opt/mozilla/bin/defaults

  mkdir -p ${startdir}/pkg/usr/share/applications
  mkdir -p ${startdir}/pkg/usr/share/pixmaps
  convert ${startdir}/src/mozilla/browser/app/default.xpm ${startdir}/pkg/usr/share/pixmaps/firefox.png
  install -m644 ${startdir}/src/firefox.desktop ${startdir}/pkg/usr/share/applications/
  install -m644 ${startdir}/src/firefox-safe.desktop ${startdir}/pkg/usr/share/applications/

  mkdir -p ${startdir}/pkg/opt/mozilla/lib/firefox/chrome/icons/default
  install -m644 ${startdir}/src/mozilla/browser/app/default.xpm ${startdir}/pkg/opt/mozilla/lib/firefox/chrome/icons/default/
  install -m644 ${startdir}/src/mozilla/browser/app/default.xpm ${startdir}/pkg/opt/mozilla/lib/firefox/icons/
}
md5sums=('b2f982f9f3085195d4797957537ca75d'
         'b6b9a0977d33f79b79d58f0b501578e7'
         '224962b5f2446cab7727fdf07fd526de'
         'bd5db57c23c72a02a489592644f18995'
         '29194973e2a535b460c6b7f92c635eaf'
         '2082c2a2d1cedd08e83179271aacf337'
         '362f9e0b0f25b964f7120b68fb629ee0'
         '60b4bbe73d2e919ee4a6476dca6705b6'
         '288fb7db871700ff5cf7286db6192b45'
         '25f355113cdee6800380c6e1a4cd38f0'
         '11b221ff41078d97c131e17361072e47'
         '300170989d3743fda3e4b7a21ac56ed4'
         '713a9587dd024f5d03f1fe9c095da9de'
         '4d0713c0a94a367a4e84d5f7e56de631'
         'affb470ca6bac11a7f3005e2508621a8'
         '52a9fc53aa12117dc392cb1dbdc56ae9'
         '74ea70c9e935f0e7f7b75436fe33efd5'
         '5e68cabfcf3c021806b326f664ac505e')

I have take a look at the package build, what a "mess". I just build a Firefox 2.0.0.11-3 based on the PKGBUILD from Firefox 2.0.0.11-1

also I rebuild the flash plugin and try to build a new mozilla-common package. At the moment I didn't see how can I get the flashplugin to work. hmm

pkgname=flashplugin
pkgver=9.0.115.0
pkgrel=3
pkgdesc="Macromedia flash plugin for Netscape/Mozilla (nonfree)"
depends=('mozilla-common' 'libxt' 'gtk2')
replaces=('flashplugin-beta')
url="http://www.macromedia.com/software/flashplayer/"
license="custom"
source=(http://fpdownload.macromedia.com/get/flashplayer/current/install_flash_player_9_linux.tar.gz
        adobe_eula.txt)
arch=('i686')

build() {
  mkdir -p $startdir/pkg/opt/mozilla/lib/plugins
  install -m755 $startdir/src/install_flash_player_9_linux/libflashplayer.so \
    $startdir/pkg/opt/mozilla/lib/plugins || return 1
  #install license
  install -D -m644 $startdir/src/adobe_eula.txt \
    $startdir/pkg/usr/share/licenses/$pkgname/LICENSE || return 1
}
md5sums=('93b7c48eaa492237b807a3ae1de65cf9'
         '7d8638844b8be3e841ff29e0162577cb')

openSUSE
Arch Linux
USALUG

Offline

#18 2008-02-08 23:17:13

yabbadabbadont
Member
Registered: 2008-01-19
Posts: 22

Re: Update 02/07/08 MessUp [solved]

bangkok_manouel wrote:
Beginners Guide wrote:

Pacman-Mirror

Choose a mirror repository for pacman.

    * archlinux.org is throttled, limiting downloads to 50KB/s

I have a slow net connection, so the throttling doesn't bother me.

Offline

#19 2008-02-08 23:18:35

yabbadabbadont
Member
Registered: 2008-01-19
Posts: 22

Re: Update 02/07/08 MessUp [solved]

Cerebral wrote:
yabbadabbadont wrote:

Nope.  Just core, extra, and community.  I'm using the primary server for all updates.

ftp.archlinux.org is not the "primary server" - it's a mirror, just like every other mirror.  It has every chance of being just as out-of-date as any other mirror in the list.

Whatever.  It appears to get updated much more quickly than any of the other mirrors I have tried.

Offline

#20 2008-02-09 01:58:19

JaDa
Member
From: Sun City, CA (native German)
Registered: 2007-04-06
Posts: 210
Website

Re: Update 02/07/08 MessUp [solved]

The problem with gcc was solved after update to gcc-libs 4.2.3-3, thank's for the quick fix big_smile

now Firefox and the flashplugin. I removed all mozilla applications, deleted the Mozilla and firefox Folders in /opt/* and /usr/* and Installed all new.

Well the problem with Firefox was solved. What ever it was, I have no Idea.

I checked my another two browsers Opera & Seamonkey. Opera 9.25 works fine with out Flash (not compatible to flashplugin 9.0.115.0-2) but Seamonkey want take any plugins.

see how it looks

Opera "opera:plugins"
NS4PluginProxyapplication/x-opera-nsplugin    -
/usr/lib/opera/plugins/libnpp.so
 
DivX® Web Playervideo/divx    divx
/usr/lib/mozilla/plugins/libtotem-mully-plugin.so
 
Totem Web Browser Plugin 2.20.1audio/wav    wav
audio/x-wav    wav
video/mpeg    mpeg,mpg,mpe,m2v,m1v,mpa
audio/mpeg    mp3,mp2,mpga
application/ogg    ogg
audio/ogg    ogg
audio/x-ogg    ogg
video/ogg    ogg
video/x-ogg    ogg
application/x-nsv-vp3-mp3    nsv
video/flv    flv
/usr/lib/mozilla/plugins/libtotem-basic-plugin.so
 
QuickTime Plug-in 7.2.0video/mp4    mp4
video/quicktime    qt,mov
image/x-macpaint    pntg
image/x-quicktime    pict, pict1, pict2
video/x-m4v    m4v
/usr/lib/mozilla/plugins/libtotem-narrowspace-plugin.so
 
Windows Media Player Plug-in 10 (compatible; Totem)video/x-msvideo    avi
video/x-ms-asf    asf,asx
application/asx    -
video/x-ms-asf-plugin    -
application/x-mplayer2    -
video/x-ms-wm    wm
video/x-ms-wvx    wvx
video/x-ms-wmv    wmv
video/x-wmv    wmv
application/x-ms-wms    wms
/usr/lib/mozilla/plugins/libtotem-gmp-plugin.so
Seamonkey "about:plugins"

No plug-ins are installed
Find more information about browser plug-ins at mozilla.org.
Help for installing plug-ins is available from plugindoc.mozdev.org.

and some screenshots maybe it will help trouble shouting .........
http://files.myopera.com/Jada0007/arch/mozilla-1.jpg
http://files.myopera.com/Jada0007/arch/mozilla-2.jpg
http://files.myopera.com/Jada0007/arch/mozilla-3.jpg
http://files.myopera.com/Jada0007/arch/mozilla-4.jpg
http://files.myopera.com/Jada0007/arch/mozilla-5.jpg
http://files.myopera.com/Jada0007/arch/mozilla-6.jpg

http://files.myopera.com/Jada0007/album … pshot2.png

Last edited by JaDa (2008-02-09 02:02:00)


openSUSE
Arch Linux
USALUG

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB