Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #1782 > unrolled thread

New Linux flash player 64bit release plugin

Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc

Contents

  New Linux flash player 64bit release plugin The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2011-07-14 21:19 +0100
    Re: New Linux flash player 64bit release plugin General Schvantzkoph <schvantzkoph@yahoo.com> - 2011-07-14 20:52 +0000
      Re: New Linux flash player 64bit release plugin The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2011-07-14 22:01 +0100
      Re: New Linux flash player 64bit release plugin Balwinder S Dheeman <bsd.SANSPAM@anu.homelinux.net> - 2011-07-15 12:03 +0530
        Re: New Linux flash player 64bit release plugin The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2011-07-15 08:45 +0100
        Re: New Linux flash player 64bit release plugin Brian Morrison <bdm@fenrir.org.uk> - 2011-07-15 14:38 +0100
          Re: New Linux flash player 64bit release plugin The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2011-07-15 14:43 +0100
            Re: New Linux flash player 64bit release plugin Brian Morrison <bdm@fenrir.org.uk> - 2011-07-15 15:23 +0100
              Re: New Linux flash player 64bit release plugin The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2011-07-15 17:31 +0100
                Re: New Linux flash player 64bit release plugin Brian Morrison <bdm@fenrir.org.uk> - 2011-07-15 18:04 +0100
            Re: New Linux flash player 64bit release plugin Mark <i@dontgetlotsofspamanymore.invalid> - 2011-07-18 11:45 +0100
          Re: New Linux flash player 64bit release plugin Balwinder S Dheeman <bsd.SANSPAM@anu.homelinux.net> - 2011-07-15 19:30 +0530
            Re: New Linux flash player 64bit release plugin Brian Morrison <bdm@fenrir.org.uk> - 2011-07-15 15:24 +0100
              Re: New Linux flash player 64bit release plugin The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2011-07-15 17:30 +0100
                Re: New Linux flash player 64bit release plugin General Schvantzkoph <schvantzkoph@yahoo.com> - 2011-07-15 19:53 +0000
                  Re: New Linux flash player 64bit release plugin The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2011-07-15 21:30 +0100
            Re: New Linux flash player 64bit release plugin The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2011-07-15 17:22 +0100
    Re: New Linux flash player 64bit release plugin "David W. Hodgins" <dwhodgins@nomail.afraid.org> - 2011-07-14 16:48 -0400
      Re: New Linux flash player 64bit release plugin The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2011-07-14 22:08 +0100
        Re: New Linux flash player 64bit release plugin "David W. Hodgins" <dwhodgins@nomail.afraid.org> - 2011-07-14 17:16 -0400
          Re: New Linux flash player 64bit release plugin The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2011-07-15 00:45 +0100
    Re: New Linux flash player 64bit release plugin General Schvantzkoph <schvantzkoph@yahoo.com> - 2011-07-15 14:02 +0000
      Re: New Linux flash player 64bit release plugin The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2011-07-15 17:15 +0100
        Re: New Linux flash player 64bit release plugin General Schvantzkoph <schvantzkoph@yahoo.com> - 2011-07-15 18:31 +0000
          Re: New Linux flash player 64bit release plugin "David W. Hodgins" <dwhodgins@nomail.afraid.org> - 2011-07-15 15:12 -0400
          Re: New Linux flash player 64bit release plugin The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2011-07-15 21:27 +0100
        Re: New Linux flash player 64bit release plugin Aragorn <stryder@telenet.be.invalid> - 2011-07-16 04:17 +0200

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#1782 — New Linux flash player 64bit release plugin

http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/flashplatformruntimes/flashplayer11/

However, as with the square release it STILL wont play telegraph videos 
for me.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/india/8636111/Mumbai-blasts-coordinated-attack-by-terrorists-says-minister.html

It does however, play other sites that were previously broken. in 
anything later than 10.0r45

Anyone confirm that it works for them? Or not?

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1783

On Thu, 14 Jul 2011 21:19:05 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/flashplatformruntimes/flashplayer11/
> 
> However, as with the square release it STILL wont play telegraph videos
> for me.
> 
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/india/8636111/Mumbai-
blasts-coordinated-attack-by-terrorists-says-minister.html
> 
> It does however, play other sites that were previously broken. in
> anything later than 10.0r45
> 
> Anyone confirm that it works for them? Or not?

It's about time they had a new beta. Any bets on if they ever get to real 
release? It would be nice if this was in the Adobe YUM repo.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1784

General Schvantzkoph wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Jul 2011 21:19:05 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> 
>> http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/flashplatformruntimes/flashplayer11/
>>
>> However, as with the square release it STILL wont play telegraph videos
>> for me.
>>
>> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/india/8636111/Mumbai-
> blasts-coordinated-attack-by-terrorists-says-minister.html
>> It does however, play other sites that were previously broken. in
>> anything later than 10.0r45
>>
>> Anyone confirm that it works for them? Or not?
> 
> It's about time they had a new beta. Any bets on if they ever get to real 
> release? It would be nice if this was in the Adobe YUM repo.

Frankly I don't care what they call it, as long as it works!

Right now its 95%.

For me.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1795

On 07/15/2011 02:22 AM, General Schvantzkoph wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Jul 2011 21:19:05 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/flashplatformruntimes/flashplayer11/
>>
>> However, as with the square release it STILL wont play telegraph videos
>> for me.
>>
>> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/india/8636111/Mumbai-
> blasts-coordinated-attack-by-terrorists-says-minister.html
>>
>> It does however, play other sites that were previously broken. in
>> anything later than 10.0r45
>>
>> Anyone confirm that it works for them? Or not?
>
> It's about time they had a new beta. Any bets on if they ever get to real
> release? It would be nice if this was in the Adobe YUM repo.

Almost all 'The Telegraph' and other flash video play nicely here with 
Flash Player 10 version 10,3,181,26 and Firefox version 5.0 (for Ubuntu 
lucid), a PPA installed on Debian GNU/Linux testing (wheezy).

IMHO, the Chromium-browser also installed from an Ubuntu PPA on the same 
machine plays these and, or other videos more smoothly. Current or 
installed version is 14.0.822.0~svn20110714r92464-0ubuntu1~ucd1~lucid 
(that's a snapshot build) updated/upgraded daily.

-- 
Balwinder S "bdheeman" Dheeman
(http://werc.homelinux.net/contact/)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1797

Balwinder S Dheeman wrote:
> On 07/15/2011 02:22 AM, General Schvantzkoph wrote:
>> On Thu, 14 Jul 2011 21:19:05 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>>> http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/flashplatformruntimes/flashplayer11/
>>>
>>> However, as with the square release it STILL wont play telegraph videos
>>> for me.
>>>
>>> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/india/8636111/Mumbai-
>> blasts-coordinated-attack-by-terrorists-says-minister.html
>>>
>>> It does however, play other sites that were previously broken. in
>>> anything later than 10.0r45
>>>
>>> Anyone confirm that it works for them? Or not?
>>
>> It's about time they had a new beta. Any bets on if they ever get to real
>> release? It would be nice if this was in the Adobe YUM repo.
> 
> Almost all 'The Telegraph' and other flash video play nicely here with 
> Flash Player 10 version 10,3,181,26 and Firefox version 5.0 (for Ubuntu 
> lucid), a PPA installed on Debian GNU/Linux testing (wheezy).
> 

So once again, not 64 bit..
I know 32 bit works.

> IMHO, the Chromium-browser also installed from an Ubuntu PPA on the same 
> machine plays these and, or other videos more smoothly. Current or 
> installed version is 14.0.822.0~svn20110714r92464-0ubuntu1~ucd1~lucid 
> (that's a snapshot build) updated/upgraded daily.
> 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1800

On Fri, 15 Jul 2011 12:03:05 +0530
Balwinder S Dheeman <bsd.SANSPAM@anu.homelinux.net> wrote:

> Flash Player 10 version 10,3,181,26

There is now a .34 version for Windows at least, you might like to see
if there is an updated version for Linux.

-- 

Brian Morrison

   "Sir Henry's brother Hubert, in his mid-forties and still unusual,
       rolled his eyes like dice and came up with an unlucky 13."

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1801

Brian Morrison wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Jul 2011 12:03:05 +0530
> Balwinder S Dheeman <bsd.SANSPAM@anu.homelinux.net> wrote:
> 
>> Flash Player 10 version 10,3,181,26
> 
> There is now a .34 version for Windows at least, you might like to see
> if there is an updated version for Linux.
> 
there is only one current 64 bit native flash for linux.

Please, this is not about 32 bit versions, which work.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1804

On Fri, 15 Jul 2011 14:43:03 +0100
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> Brian Morrison wrote:
> > On Fri, 15 Jul 2011 12:03:05 +0530
> > Balwinder S Dheeman <bsd.SANSPAM@anu.homelinux.net> wrote:
> > 
> >> Flash Player 10 version 10,3,181,26
> > 
> > There is now a .34 version for Windows at least, you might like to see
> > if there is an updated version for Linux.
> > 
> there is only one current 64 bit native flash for linux.

I know.

> 
> Please, this is not about 32 bit versions, which work.

I was merely pointing out the release of another of the interminable
security updates from Adobe.

-- 

Brian Morrison

   "Sir Henry's brother Hubert, in his mid-forties and still unusual,
       rolled his eyes like dice and came up with an unlucky 13."

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1809

Brian Morrison wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Jul 2011 14:43:03 +0100
> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> Brian Morrison wrote:
>>> On Fri, 15 Jul 2011 12:03:05 +0530
>>> Balwinder S Dheeman <bsd.SANSPAM@anu.homelinux.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Flash Player 10 version 10,3,181,26
>>> There is now a .34 version for Windows at least, you might like to see
>>> if there is an updated version for Linux.
>>>
>> there is only one current 64 bit native flash for linux.
> 
> I know.
> 
>> Please, this is not about 32 bit versions, which work.
> 
> I was merely pointing out the release of another of the interminable
> security updates from Adobe.
> 
heck these days everything has interminable security updates.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1810

On Fri, 15 Jul 2011 17:31:07 +0100
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> > I was merely pointing out the release of another of the interminable
> > security updates from Adobe.
> >   
> heck these days everything has interminable security updates.

But rarely ones that patch coach-and-horses vulnerabilities like the
flashplayer stuff has.

-- 

Brian Morrison

   "Sir Henry's brother Hubert, in his mid-forties and still unusual,
       rolled his eyes like dice and came up with an unlucky 13."

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1836

On Fri, 15 Jul 2011 14:43:03 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
<tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

>Brian Morrison wrote:
>> On Fri, 15 Jul 2011 12:03:05 +0530
>> Balwinder S Dheeman <bsd.SANSPAM@anu.homelinux.net> wrote:
>> 
>>> Flash Player 10 version 10,3,181,26
>> 
>> There is now a .34 version for Windows at least, you might like to see
>> if there is an updated version for Linux.
>> 
>there is only one current 64 bit native flash for linux.
>
>Please, this is not about 32 bit versions, which work.

Albeit very slowly.
-- 
(\__/)  M.
(='.'=) Due to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
(")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking some articles
posted from there.  If you wish your postings to be seen by
everyone you will need use a different method of posting.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1803

On 07/15/2011 07:08 PM, Brian Morrison wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Jul 2011 12:03:05 +0530
> Balwinder S Dheeman<bsd.SANSPAM@anu.homelinux.net>  wrote:
>
>> Flash Player 10 version 10,3,181,26
>
> There is now a .34 version for Windows at least, you might like to see
> if there is an updated version for Linux.

Flash Player 10 version 10,3,181,34 is 32bit only, whereas the FP 11 is 
Beta1 as yet; it can be buggy.

-- 
Balwinder S "bdheeman" Dheeman
(http://werc.homelinux.net/contact/)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1805

On Fri, 15 Jul 2011 19:30:57 +0530
Balwinder S Dheeman <bsd.SANSPAM@anu.homelinux.net> wrote:

> On 07/15/2011 07:08 PM, Brian Morrison wrote:
> > On Fri, 15 Jul 2011 12:03:05 +0530
> > Balwinder S Dheeman<bsd.SANSPAM@anu.homelinux.net>  wrote:
> >
> >> Flash Player 10 version 10,3,181,26
> >
> > There is now a .34 version for Windows at least, you might like to see
> > if there is an updated version for Linux.
> 
> Flash Player 10 version 10,3,181,34 is 32bit only, whereas the FP 11 is 
> Beta1 as yet; it can be buggy.
> 

I know, I was only referring to the need to update for security
reasons, pity that Adobe can't write decent code for peanuts.

-- 

Brian Morrison

   "Sir Henry's brother Hubert, in his mid-forties and still unusual,
       rolled his eyes like dice and came up with an unlucky 13."

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1808

Brian Morrison wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Jul 2011 19:30:57 +0530
> Balwinder S Dheeman <bsd.SANSPAM@anu.homelinux.net> wrote:
> 
>> On 07/15/2011 07:08 PM, Brian Morrison wrote:
>>> On Fri, 15 Jul 2011 12:03:05 +0530
>>> Balwinder S Dheeman<bsd.SANSPAM@anu.homelinux.net>  wrote:
>>>
>>>> Flash Player 10 version 10,3,181,26
>>> There is now a .34 version for Windows at least, you might like to see
>>> if there is an updated version for Linux.
>> Flash Player 10 version 10,3,181,34 is 32bit only, whereas the FP 11 is 
>> Beta1 as yet; it can be buggy.
>>
> 
> I know, I was only referring to the need to update for security
> reasons, pity that Adobe can't write decent code for peanuts.
> 
Amen to that.

Postcript. The only way to represent a document larger than the combined 
text, formatting bitmaps and fonts, known to man and require more 
processing power to print, than a computer that displays it.

Creative suite. The only piece of code that is so completely 
inconsistent in how it handles its working file names (strings is 
interesting) that it cannot be installed on a case sensitive file 
system, despite these having been available since OSX started,.
  A bug that one intern could fix in a week, by code walking for less 
than the cost of a single retail copy,  has been in there for over three 
years apparently.

Flash the video version of postscript . The only way to make a movie 
require ten times as much processing power as it needs to, to display in 
any other format whatsoever.

I am sure others could add more.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1815

On Fri, 15 Jul 2011 17:30:19 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> Brian Morrison wrote:
>> On Fri, 15 Jul 2011 19:30:57 +0530
>> Balwinder S Dheeman <bsd.SANSPAM@anu.homelinux.net> wrote:
>> 
>>> On 07/15/2011 07:08 PM, Brian Morrison wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 15 Jul 2011 12:03:05 +0530
>>>> Balwinder S Dheeman<bsd.SANSPAM@anu.homelinux.net>  wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Flash Player 10 version 10,3,181,26
>>>> There is now a .34 version for Windows at least, you might like to
>>>> see if there is an updated version for Linux.
>>> Flash Player 10 version 10,3,181,34 is 32bit only, whereas the FP 11
>>> is Beta1 as yet; it can be buggy.
>>>
>>>
>> I know, I was only referring to the need to update for security
>> reasons, pity that Adobe can't write decent code for peanuts.
>> 
> Amen to that.
> 
> Postcript. The only way to represent a document larger than the combined
> text, formatting bitmaps and fonts, known to man and require more
> processing power to print, than a computer that displays it.
> 
> Creative suite. The only piece of code that is so completely
> inconsistent in how it handles its working file names (strings is
> interesting) that it cannot be installed on a case sensitive file
> system, despite these having been available since OSX started,.
>   A bug that one intern could fix in a week, by code walking for less
> than the cost of a single retail copy,  has been in there for over three
> years apparently.
> 
> Flash the video version of postscript . The only way to make a movie
> require ten times as much processing power as it needs to, to display in
> any other format whatsoever.
> 
> I am sure others could add more.

As long as we're bitching about Adobe's incompetence don't forget Acrobat 
Reader. Reader is full of memory leaks, if Adobe built submarines they 
would put screen doors on them. Every release of Reader is worse than the 
last, have you noticed that if you keep multiple documents open it will 
have periodic hangs that can last for a minute? Acrobat has been around 
since the mid 90s, how is it possible that they haven't been able to fix 
it in all that time?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1818

General Schvantzkoph wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Jul 2011 17:30:19 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> 
>> Brian Morrison wrote:
>>> On Fri, 15 Jul 2011 19:30:57 +0530
>>> Balwinder S Dheeman <bsd.SANSPAM@anu.homelinux.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 07/15/2011 07:08 PM, Brian Morrison wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 15 Jul 2011 12:03:05 +0530
>>>>> Balwinder S Dheeman<bsd.SANSPAM@anu.homelinux.net>  wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Flash Player 10 version 10,3,181,26
>>>>> There is now a .34 version for Windows at least, you might like to
>>>>> see if there is an updated version for Linux.
>>>> Flash Player 10 version 10,3,181,34 is 32bit only, whereas the FP 11
>>>> is Beta1 as yet; it can be buggy.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> I know, I was only referring to the need to update for security
>>> reasons, pity that Adobe can't write decent code for peanuts.
>>>
>> Amen to that.
>>
>> Postcript. The only way to represent a document larger than the combined
>> text, formatting bitmaps and fonts, known to man and require more
>> processing power to print, than a computer that displays it.
>>
>> Creative suite. The only piece of code that is so completely
>> inconsistent in how it handles its working file names (strings is
>> interesting) that it cannot be installed on a case sensitive file
>> system, despite these having been available since OSX started,.
>>   A bug that one intern could fix in a week, by code walking for less
>> than the cost of a single retail copy,  has been in there for over three
>> years apparently.
>>
>> Flash the video version of postscript . The only way to make a movie
>> require ten times as much processing power as it needs to, to display in
>> any other format whatsoever.
>>
>> I am sure others could add more.
> 
> As long as we're bitching about Adobe's incompetence don't forget Acrobat 
> Reader. Reader is full of memory leaks, if Adobe built submarines they 
> would put screen doors on them. Every release of Reader is worse than the 
> last, have you noticed that if you keep multiple documents open it will 
> have periodic hangs that can last for a minute? Acrobat has been around 
> since the mid 90s, how is it possible that they haven't been able to fix 
> it in all that time?

Acrobat reader just crashed on my linux, so I use evince I think it is.

99% of all PDFs render fine, and I have windows in a virtual machine for 
the other 1%...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1807

Balwinder S Dheeman wrote:
> On 07/15/2011 07:08 PM, Brian Morrison wrote:
>> On Fri, 15 Jul 2011 12:03:05 +0530
>> Balwinder S Dheeman<bsd.SANSPAM@anu.homelinux.net>  wrote:
>>
>>> Flash Player 10 version 10,3,181,26
>>
>> There is now a .34 version for Windows at least, you might like to see
>> if there is an updated version for Linux.
> 
> Flash Player 10 version 10,3,181,34 is 32bit only, whereas the FP 11 is 
> Beta1 as yet; it can be buggy.
> 

The problem is that no 64 bit *native* version of flashplugin - and I 
have 5  to choose from - has *ever* played that site.

32 bit? Fine.

Now its a weird way they present the flash - JavaScript and so on 
wrapped all around it - so I wondered whether the issue was in that, and 
firefox,

but the  General says its borked on chrome to, which kind of makes the 
flash player the common factor.
.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1785

On Thu, 14 Jul 2011 16:19:05 -0400, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/flashplatformruntimes/flashplayer11/
> However, as with the square release it STILL wont play telegraph videos
> for me.
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/india/8636111/Mumbai-blasts-coordinated-attack-by-terrorists-says-minister.html

That site plays for me, using opera, and flash 11 on i586 with Mageia 1.
It took quite a while to load, with just a black rectangle showing
until it had.

Regards, Dave Hodgins

-- 
Change nomail.afraid.org to ody.ca to reply by email.
(nomail.afraid.org has been set up specifically for
use in usenet. Feel free to use it yourself.)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1786

David W. Hodgins wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Jul 2011 16:19:05 -0400, The Natural Philosopher 
> <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/flashplatformruntimes/flashplayer11/
>> However, as with the square release it STILL wont play telegraph videos
>> for me.
>> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/india/8636111/Mumbai-blasts-coordinated-attack-by-terrorists-says-minister.html 
>>
> 
> That site plays for me, using opera, and flash 11 on i586 with Mageia 1.
> It took quite a while to load, with just a black rectangle showing
> until it had.
> ##


what's i586? 32 bit?

Have firefox?

> Regards, Dave Hodgins
> 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1787

On Thu, 14 Jul 2011 17:08:29 -0400, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> David W. Hodgins wrote:
>> On Thu, 14 Jul 2011 16:19:05 -0400, The Natural Philosopher
>> <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/flashplatformruntimes/flashplayer11/
>>> However, as with the square release it STILL wont play telegraph videos
>>> for me.
>>> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/india/8636111/Mumbai-blasts-coordinated-attack-by-terrorists-says-minister.html

>> That site plays for me, using opera, and flash 11 on i586 with Mageia 1.
>> It took quite a while to load, with just a black rectangle showing
>> until it had.

> what's i586? 32 bit?

Yes.

> Have firefox?

Yes (4.0.1), and the telegraph site plays in that too.  Again takes about
30-40 seconds with just a black rectangle displayed, before it starts
playing.

Regards, Dave Hodgins

-- 
Change nomail.afraid.org to ody.ca to reply by email.
(nomail.afraid.org has been set up specifically for
use in usenet. Feel free to use it yourself.)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc

csiph-web