32bit vs 64bit

[Sam Varshavchik]

Patrick O'Callaghan writes:

> On Tue, 2008-09-16 at 22:05 -0400, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
>> Rahul Sundaram writes:
>> 
>> > Sam Varshavchik wrote:
>> > 
>> >> However, nothing stops you from installing 32 bit Firefox, which will 
>> >> run just fine on a 64 bit Fedora install.
>> > 
>> > You don't have to do that. Fedora by default installs nspluginwrapper 
>> > which works with the 32-bit plugins on 64-bit arch. It also has the 
>> > advantage of adding more stability and security (via SELinux policy) by 
>> > separating the plugins into different process.
>> 
>> Maybe, but I was never able to get it to work. Installing nspluginwrapper 
>> didn't seem to have any effect. Flash never showed up as a registered plugin 
>> in Firefox, and there was absolutely no feedback whatsoever, regarding what 
>> the problem might be.
> 
> Do you have libflashsupport installed? Note that on 64-bit systems you
> need both the i386 and x86_64 versions.
> 
> (BTW, this has to be one of the most frequenty asked questions on this
> list).

That might be the reason. I do not have any 32 bit stuff installed, and have 
"exclude=*.i386 *.i586 *.i686" in yumconf. Installing any 32 bit stuff adds 
so much bloat, that it's just not worth it.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list/attachments/20080916/47d9e884/attachment-0001.sig>