Arch Linux

ELWisty

Member

From: Helsinki, Finland

Registered: 2009-10-13

Posts: 55

Website

Flashplugin, HAL and differences between Arch and Ubuntu?

Hi,

Hoping someone expert both in Arch and Ubuntu has some idea on this.

I'm trying to watch a video download I purchased at a video-on-demand service, whose player is an Adobe Air application. The service's downloads have DRM with Flash Access.

I found some topics in Adobe's forums regarding Ubuntu, according to which the Linux version of flash plugin should have Flash Access support - and the combination of Ubuntu 11.10 (32 bit and 64 bit) and flash plugin 11.1 indeed works, provided that HAL is installed.

In 32 bit and 64 bit Arch, with flash plugin 11.1 and HAL installed, I get a DRM error and the video fails to play. I've also tried flash plugin 11.2 beta and the 10.1 version.

I can find no error messages in any logs, so I'm puzzled. What could be the difference that causes Flash Access to work in Ubuntu but not to work in Arch? Difference in the flash plugin packages? Differences in kernel, other than version number (3.1 for arch, 3.0 for Ubuntu)? Differences in HAL?

---

Maria Niku: Photography

dodo3773

Member

Registered: 2011-03-17

Posts: 818

Re: Flashplugin, HAL and differences between Arch and Ubuntu?

As long as you are using the same browser on both distros the next step for me would be looking to see if Ubuntu uses a custom mms.cfg (/etc/adobe/mms.cfg). That is the only thing I can think of.

brebs

Member

Registered: 2007-04-03

Posts: 3,742

Re: Flashplugin, HAL and differences between Arch and Ubuntu?

Arch uses a bleeding-edge xorg-server, whereas Ubuntu uses a patched 1.10.4.

I actually use Ubuntu's xorg-server version & patches (it needs  --enable-gestures, to compile), because I've found it to be very stable, and compatible with flash. I know from my own testing that various xorg-server versions can have problems with flash, e.g. 1.11.3 made flash pause.

I suppose there's also the libdrm version difference?