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

Groups > linux.debian.user > #166149 > unrolled thread

Re: Flash update

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: Flash update Anthony Campbell <ac@acampbell.uk> - 2016-04-01 13:40 +0200
    Re: Flash update Adam Wilson <moxalt@riseup.net> - 2016-04-02 06:10 +0200
      Re: Flash update Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-04-02 21:40 +0200
        Re: Flash update Adam Wilson <moxalt@riseup.net> - 2016-04-03 18:10 +0200
          Re: Flash update Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-04-03 21:00 +0200
            Re: Flash update Adam Wilson <moxalt@riseup.net> - 2016-04-03 21:00 +0200
      Re: Flash update Adam Wilson <moxalt@riseup.net> - 2016-04-03 08:30 +0200
    Re: Flash update David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2016-04-02 06:40 +0200
      Re: Flash update Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2016-04-02 12:10 +0200
      Re: Flash update Adam Wilson <moxalt@riseup.net> - 2016-04-03 07:40 +0200
        Re: Flash update Jude DaShiell <jdashiel@panix.com> - 2016-04-03 13:40 +0200
        Re: Flash update David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2016-04-04 06:20 +0200
          Re: Flash update Jörg-Volker Peetz <jvpeetz@web.de> - 2016-04-04 08:50 +0200
            Re: Flash update Mark Fletcher <mark27q1@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 15:20 +0200
            Re: Flash update David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2016-04-04 17:20 +0200
          Re: Flash update Adam Wilson <moxalt@riseup.net> - 2016-04-04 17:20 +0200
            Re: Flash update David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2016-04-04 21:30 +0200
              Re: Flash update Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2016-04-05 02:40 +0200
                Re: Flash update Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 03:00 +0200
                  Re: Flash update Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2016-04-05 03:50 +0200
                  Re: Flash update Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2016-04-05 11:10 +0200
                    Re: Flash update Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 18:00 +0200
    Re: Flash update Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-04-03 21:50 +0200
      Re: Flash update Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-04-04 15:10 +0200
        Re: Flash update Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 16:20 +0200
          Re: Flash update Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-04-04 20:50 +0200

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#166149 — Re: Flash update

On 27 Jun 2015, Lisi Reisz wrote:
[snip]

> > > >
> > > > 1. Using iplayer with flash involves downloading a file.
> > > >
> > > > 2. Wouldn't it be nice if the file could be downloaded, preferably
> > > > using a program which is in a package in the Debian archives?
> > > >
> > > > 3. Such a package has been mentioned in this thread. It is extensively
> > > >    documented at the program's home page and in its manual.
> > > >
> > > > 4. The file being downloaded is a .flv. While it is being downloaded it
> > > >    is being stored on disk so it can be accessed and viewed. vlc is one
> > > >    player which can view .flv files.


[snip]

I know this is an old thread, but I thought it would be worth mentioning
that BBC IPlayer now works without Flash. If you go to the BBC IPlayer
web page it says you can access the programs using HTML5. You just have
to install a cookie to do this. It's still in beta but it works for me,
at least with recent versions of Firefox and Chromium.


-- 
Anthony Campbell			http://www.acampbell.uk

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#166183

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Fri, 1 Apr 2016 11:39:29 +0100
Anthony Campbell <ac@acampbell.uk> wrote:

> On 27 Jun 2015, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> [snip]
> 
> > > > >
> > > > > 1. Using iplayer with flash involves downloading a file.
> > > > >
> > > > > 2. Wouldn't it be nice if the file could be downloaded, preferably
> > > > > using a program which is in a package in the Debian archives?
> > > > >
> > > > > 3. Such a package has been mentioned in this thread. It is extensively
> > > > >    documented at the program's home page and in its manual.
> > > > >
> > > > > 4. The file being downloaded is a .flv. While it is being downloaded it
> > > > >    is being stored on disk so it can be accessed and viewed. vlc is one
> > > > >    player which can view .flv files.
> 
> 
> [snip]
> 
> I know this is an old thread, but I thought it would be worth mentioning
> that BBC IPlayer now works without Flash. If you go to the BBC IPlayer
> web page it says you can access the programs using HTML5. You just have
> to install a cookie to do this. It's still in beta but it works for me,
> at least with recent versions of Firefox and Chromium.

Wonderful. So all the kerfuffle about getting Flash to work with DRM in Debian was for nothing after all. Huzzah!

Problem resolved.

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

#166206

On Sat 02 Apr 2016 at 06:59:29 +0300, Adam Wilson wrote:

> On Fri, 1 Apr 2016 11:39:29 +0100
> Anthony Campbell <ac@acampbell.uk> wrote:
> > 
> > I know this is an old thread, but I thought it would be worth mentioning
> > that BBC IPlayer now works without Flash. If you go to the BBC IPlayer
> > web page it says you can access the programs using HTML5. You just have
> > to install a cookie to do this. It's still in beta but it works for me,
> > at least with recent versions of Firefox and Chromium.
> 
> Wonderful. So all the kerfuffle about getting Flash to work with DRM
> in Debian was for nothing after all. Huzzah!

Flash was talked about but I do not think DRM was ever a factor in the
discussion. Hence - no kerfluffle.

A shame really. We could do with one every now and then.

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

#166276

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Sat, 2 Apr 2016 20:30:29 +0100
Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> wrote:

> On Sat 02 Apr 2016 at 06:59:29 +0300, Adam Wilson wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, 1 Apr 2016 11:39:29 +0100
> > Anthony Campbell <ac@acampbell.uk> wrote:
> > > 
> > > I know this is an old thread, but I thought it would be worth mentioning
> > > that BBC IPlayer now works without Flash. If you go to the BBC IPlayer
> > > web page it says you can access the programs using HTML5. You just have
> > > to install a cookie to do this. It's still in beta but it works for me,
> > > at least with recent versions of Firefox and Chromium.
> > 
> > Wonderful. So all the kerfuffle about getting Flash to work with DRM
> > in Debian was for nothing after all. Huzzah!
> 
> Flash was talked about but I do not think DRM was ever a factor in the
> discussion. Hence - no kerfluffle.

The kerfuffle turns into a "kerfluffle"- I like it. I was reminiscing about Lisi trying to get flashplugin-nonfree to work with something that smacked of DRM a while back- my memory may escape me.

> A shame really. We could do with one every now and then.

Kerfluffles are fun. We should (! Re: "Should") have more of them.

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

#166293

On Sun 03 Apr 2016 at 19:05:21 +0300, Adam Wilson wrote:

> On Sat, 2 Apr 2016 20:30:29 +0100
> Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> wrote:
> 
> > On Sat 02 Apr 2016 at 06:59:29 +0300, Adam Wilson wrote:
> > 
> > > On Fri, 1 Apr 2016 11:39:29 +0100
> > > Anthony Campbell <ac@acampbell.uk> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > I know this is an old thread, but I thought it would be worth mentioning
> > > > that BBC IPlayer now works without Flash. If you go to the BBC IPlayer
> > > > web page it says you can access the programs using HTML5. You just have
> > > > to install a cookie to do this. It's still in beta but it works for me,
> > > > at least with recent versions of Firefox and Chromium.
> > > 
> > > Wonderful. So all the kerfuffle about getting Flash to work with DRM
> > > in Debian was for nothing after all. Huzzah!
> > 
> > Flash was talked about but I do not think DRM was ever a factor in the
> > discussion. Hence - no kerfluffle.
> 
> The kerfuffle turns into a "kerfluffle"- I like it.

Its meaning is basically the same but with the implication of "give 'em
'ell". I'll get me coat.

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

#166295

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Sun, 3 Apr 2016 19:49:29 +0100
Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> wrote:

> On Sun 03 Apr 2016 at 19:05:21 +0300, Adam Wilson wrote:
> 
> > On Sat, 2 Apr 2016 20:30:29 +0100
> > Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> wrote:
> > 
> > > On Sat 02 Apr 2016 at 06:59:29 +0300, Adam Wilson wrote:
> > > 
> > > > On Fri, 1 Apr 2016 11:39:29 +0100
> > > > Anthony Campbell <ac@acampbell.uk> wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > I know this is an old thread, but I thought it would be worth
> > > > > mentioning that BBC IPlayer now works without Flash. If you
> > > > > go to the BBC IPlayer web page it says you can access the
> > > > > programs using HTML5. You just have to install a cookie to do
> > > > > this. It's still in beta but it works for me, at least with
> > > > > recent versions of Firefox and Chromium.
> > > > 
> > > > Wonderful. So all the kerfuffle about getting Flash to work
> > > > with DRM in Debian was for nothing after all. Huzzah!
> > > 
> > > Flash was talked about but I do not think DRM was ever a factor
> > > in the discussion. Hence - no kerfluffle.
> > 
> > The kerfuffle turns into a "kerfluffle"- I like it.
> 
> Its meaning is basically the same but with the implication of "give
> 'em 'ell". I'll get me coat.

I have never heard it as "kerfluffle", so I was pleasantly surprised. A
kerfuffle is just a nice Scotsy word for a fuss, but a "kerfluffle"
sounds remarkably... cute. "Fluffle". Aww.

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

#166231

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Sat, 2 Apr 2016 06:59:29 +0300
Adam Wilson <moxalt@riseup.net> wrote:

> On Fri, 1 Apr 2016 11:39:29 +0100
> Anthony Campbell <ac@acampbell.uk> wrote:
> 
> > On 27 Jun 2015, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> > [snip]
> > 
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 1. Using iplayer with flash involves downloading a file.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 2. Wouldn't it be nice if the file could be downloaded, preferably
> > > > > > using a program which is in a package in the Debian archives?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 3. Such a package has been mentioned in this thread. It is extensively
> > > > > >    documented at the program's home page and in its manual.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 4. The file being downloaded is a .flv. While it is being downloaded it
> > > > > >    is being stored on disk so it can be accessed and viewed. vlc is one
> > > > > >    player which can view .flv files.
> > 
> > 
> > [snip]
> > 
> > I know this is an old thread, but I thought it would be worth mentioning
> > that BBC IPlayer now works without Flash. If you go to the BBC IPlayer
> > web page it says you can access the programs using HTML5. You just have
> > to install a cookie to do this. It's still in beta but it works for me,
> > at least with recent versions of Firefox and Chromium.
> 
> Wonderful. So all the kerfuffle about getting Flash to work with DRM in Debian was for nothing after all. Huzzah!
> 
> Problem resolved.

Down with Flash! Down with Adobe!

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

#166185

On Fri 01 Apr 2016 at 11:39:29 (+0100), Anthony Campbell wrote:
> On 27 Jun 2015, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> [snip]
> 
> > > > >
> > > > > 1. Using iplayer with flash involves downloading a file.
> > > > >
> > > > > 2. Wouldn't it be nice if the file could be downloaded, preferably
> > > > > using a program which is in a package in the Debian archives?
> > > > >
> > > > > 3. Such a package has been mentioned in this thread. It is extensively
> > > > >    documented at the program's home page and in its manual.
> > > > >
> > > > > 4. The file being downloaded is a .flv. While it is being downloaded it
> > > > >    is being stored on disk so it can be accessed and viewed. vlc is one
> > > > >    player which can view .flv files.
> 
> 
> [snip]
> 
> I know this is an old thread, but I thought it would be worth mentioning
> that BBC IPlayer now works without Flash. If you go to the BBC IPlayer
> web page it says you can access the programs using HTML5. You just have
> to install a cookie to do this. It's still in beta but it works for me,
> at least with recent versions of Firefox and Chromium.

I don't think I've ever installed a cookie. How would I do this?

Is it one cookie to make the browser entirely HTML5, or is it a
different cookie for every site?

Would I know that a movie was being played with HTML5 as opposed to flash?

When flash streams a movie, a copy is downloaded somewhere on my
disk. One beneficial effect of this is that if I click the slider to
an earlier point in the movie, the player plays instantly from that
point, without a wait for buffering. Is that the same with HTML5,
or is it truly streaming (with no local copy on the disk)?

Is it easy to revert to flash if I don't like HTML5?

Cheers,
David.

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

#166191

On 2016-04-02, David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> wrote:
>> 
>> I know this is an old thread, but I thought it would be worth mentioning
>> that BBC IPlayer now works without Flash. If you go to the BBC IPlayer
>> web page it says you can access the programs using HTML5. You just have
>> to install a cookie to do this. It's still in beta but it works for me,
>> at least with recent versions of Firefox and Chromium.
>
> I don't think I've ever installed a cookie. How would I do this?

I would guess the site installs the cookie which indicates you've opted
in for the HTML5 beta rather than flash (like YouTube used to do).

> Is it one cookie to make the browser entirely HTML5, or is it a
> different cookie for every site?
>
> Would I know that a movie was being played with HTML5 as opposed to flash?

I imagine if you right-clicked inside the screen you'd know pretty
quickly if it was flash or HTML5, although I don't know the IPlayer as
I'm not in the UK (but apparently there's also a "reminder banner").

> When flash streams a movie, a copy is downloaded somewhere on my
> disk. One beneficial effect of this is that if I click the slider to
> an earlier point in the movie, the player plays instantly from that
> point, without a wait for buffering. Is that the same with HTML5,
> or is it truly streaming (with no local copy on the disk)?
>
> Is it easy to revert to flash if I don't like HTML5?

Clear the cookie probably, and you're back to where you started.

> Cheers,
> David.
>
>


-- 
Hypertext--or should I say the ideology of hypertext?--is ultrademocratic and
so entirely in harmony with the demagogic appeals to cultural democracy that
accompany (and distract one’s attention from) the ever-tightening grip of 
plutocratic capitalism. - Susan Sontag

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

#166229

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Fri, 1 Apr 2016 23:34:58 -0500
David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> wrote:

> On Fri 01 Apr 2016 at 11:39:29 (+0100), Anthony Campbell wrote:
> > On 27 Jun 2015, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> > [snip]
> > 
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 1. Using iplayer with flash involves downloading a file.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 2. Wouldn't it be nice if the file could be downloaded, preferably
> > > > > > using a program which is in a package in the Debian archives?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 3. Such a package has been mentioned in this thread. It is extensively
> > > > > >    documented at the program's home page and in its manual.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 4. The file being downloaded is a .flv. While it is being downloaded it
> > > > > >    is being stored on disk so it can be accessed and viewed. vlc is one
> > > > > >    player which can view .flv files.
> > 
> > 
> > [snip]
> > 
> > I know this is an old thread, but I thought it would be worth mentioning
> > that BBC IPlayer now works without Flash. If you go to the BBC IPlayer
> > web page it says you can access the programs using HTML5. You just have
> > to install a cookie to do this. It's still in beta but it works for me,
> > at least with recent versions of Firefox and Chromium.
> 
> I don't think I've ever installed a cookie. How would I do this?

Enable cookies in your browser- in most they are enabled by default. The rest should happen automatically.

> Is it one cookie to make the browser entirely HTML5, or is it a
> different cookie for every site?

If you are using a relatively modern browser (Midori, Iceweasel, IceCat, Firefox, or Epiphany) it should already support HTML5, and it should be able to stream videos in-browser.

In this particular use-case (the BBC website) they should be able to detect that you aren't using Flash and offer you an HTML5 video instead. If this doesn't happen automatically, usually websites which support both will offer you a link ("Use HTML5 player instead" or something to that effect).

> Would I know that a movie was being played with HTML5 as opposed to flash?

Yes. The HTML5 player has a unique look. Just open this file in your web browser:

http://audio-video.gnu.org/video/short--undated--rms--free-software-four-freedoms.ogv

and play it. If it plays successfully, then your browser supports HTML5 video, and you will now know what HTML5 looks like.

It is vastly superior to Flash both functionally and ethically.

> When flash streams a movie, a copy is downloaded somewhere on my
> disk. One beneficial effect of this is that if I click the slider to
> an earlier point in the movie, the player plays instantly from that
> point, without a wait for buffering. Is that the same with HTML5,
> or is it truly streaming (with no local copy on the disk)?

I'm not sure about this. Just because moving to an earlier point in the stream resumes from that point instantly does not necessarily mean that flash is downloading a local copy- I'm pretty sure flash just keeps the entire stream in RAM, just like HTML5.

Either way, HTML5 does this too- you can instantly resume from an already-buffered point.

> Is it easy to revert to flash if I don't like HTML5?

Re-installing the flash plugin should work fine- simply uninstall gnash (or whatever you used as your flash plugin), try out the web in HTLM5 sans flash, and then re-install gnash if you don't like it.

I think you'll be pleasantly surprised. Very little of the web requires Flash these days.

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

#166257

If you have an old browser but vlc is installed, you may be able to get 
html5 playing by adding something like this to a .mailcap file:
application/oggv; rvlc --quiet --novideo --key-vol-up 123 
--no-skinned-playlist -I ncurses '%s'; test=test -n "$DISPLAY"
The --no-video and --no-skinned-playlist switches will need removal for 
most of the members of this list and perhaps this can be improved 
further in ways people who can look at screens will know.

On Sun, 3 Apr 2016, Adam Wilson wrote:

> Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2016 02:38:00
> From: Adam Wilson <moxalt@riseup.net>
> To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: Flash update
> 
> On Fri, 1 Apr 2016 23:34:58 -0500
> David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> On Fri 01 Apr 2016 at 11:39:29 (+0100), Anthony Campbell wrote:
>>> On 27 Jun 2015, Lisi Reisz wrote:
>>> [snip]
>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1. Using iplayer with flash involves downloading a file.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2. Wouldn't it be nice if the file could be downloaded, preferably
>>>>>>> using a program which is in a package in the Debian archives?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 3. Such a package has been mentioned in this thread. It is extensively
>>>>>>>    documented at the program's home page and in its manual.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 4. The file being downloaded is a .flv. While it is being downloaded it
>>>>>>>    is being stored on disk so it can be accessed and viewed. vlc is one
>>>>>>>    player which can view .flv files.
>>>
>>>
>>> [snip]
>>>
>>> I know this is an old thread, but I thought it would be worth mentioning
>>> that BBC IPlayer now works without Flash. If you go to the BBC IPlayer
>>> web page it says you can access the programs using HTML5. You just have
>>> to install a cookie to do this. It's still in beta but it works for me,
>>> at least with recent versions of Firefox and Chromium.
>>
>> I don't think I've ever installed a cookie. How would I do this?
>
> Enable cookies in your browser- in most they are enabled by default. The rest should happen automatically.
>
>> Is it one cookie to make the browser entirely HTML5, or is it a
>> different cookie for every site?
>
> If you are using a relatively modern browser (Midori, Iceweasel, IceCat, Firefox, or Epiphany) it should already support HTML5, and it should be able to stream videos in-browser.
>
> In this particular use-case (the BBC website) they should be able to detect that you aren't using Flash and offer you an HTML5 video instead. If this doesn't happen automatically, usually websites which support both will offer you a link ("Use HTML5 player instead" or something to that effect).
>
>> Would I know that a movie was being played with HTML5 as opposed to flash?
>
> Yes. The HTML5 player has a unique look. Just open this file in your web browser:
>
> http://audio-video.gnu.org/video/short--undated--rms--free-software-four-freedoms.ogv
>
> and play it. If it plays successfully, then your browser supports HTML5 video, and you will now know what HTML5 looks like.
>
> It is vastly superior to Flash both functionally and ethically.
>
>> When flash streams a movie, a copy is downloaded somewhere on my
>> disk. One beneficial effect of this is that if I click the slider to
>> an earlier point in the movie, the player plays instantly from that
>> point, without a wait for buffering. Is that the same with HTML5,
>> or is it truly streaming (with no local copy on the disk)?
>
> I'm not sure about this. Just because moving to an earlier point in the stream resumes from that point instantly does not necessarily mean that flash is downloading a local copy- I'm pretty sure flash just keeps the entire stream in RAM, just like HTML5.
>
> Either way, HTML5 does this too- you can instantly resume from an already-buffered point.
>
>> Is it easy to revert to flash if I don't like HTML5?
>
> Re-installing the flash plugin should work fine- simply uninstall gnash (or whatever you used as your flash plugin), try out the web in HTLM5 sans flash, and then re-install gnash if you don't like it.
>
> I think you'll be pleasantly surprised. Very little of the web requires Flash these days.
>

-- 

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

#166321

On Sun 03 Apr 2016 at 09:38:00 (+0300), Adam Wilson wrote:
> On Fri, 1 Apr 2016 23:34:58 -0500 David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> wrote:
> > When flash streams a movie, a copy is downloaded somewhere on my
> > disk. One beneficial effect of this is that if I click the slider to
> > an earlier point in the movie, the player plays instantly from that
> > point, without a wait for buffering. Is that the same with HTML5,
> > or is it truly streaming (with no local copy on the disk)?
> 
> I'm not sure about this. Just because moving to an earlier point in the stream resumes from that point instantly does not necessarily mean that flash is downloading a local copy- I'm pretty sure flash just keeps the entire stream in RAM, just like HTML5.
> 
> Either way, HTML5 does this too- you can instantly resume from an already-buffered point.

No, flash writes a file. It doesn't take much ingenuity to find it.

Generally speaking with youtube, it's straightforward to find the
11-char string and use get-youtube to download the movie. With some
other sites, it doesn't appear possible to get hold of a downloadable
URL, so playing the movie and copying the flash file is the only way
I know for downloading it.

I would prefer not to lose that ability through selecting HTML5
merely because some people here say "Down with flash/Flash is dead".
If HTML5 *does* keep the information in RAM as you say, then I'm
stuck because I don't know how to find it or copy it. Can you help
with this?

Cheers,
David.

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

#166324

See package youtube-dl. Just give the URL you see in your browser
as argument to the youtube-dl command (beware of special characters,
better use "...", see man youtube-dl).
This works also for other sites with movies.

Regards,
jvp.

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

#166348

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Mon, Apr 4, 2016, 3:42 PM Jörg-Volker Peetz <jvpeetz@web.de> wrote:

> See package youtube-dl. Just give the URL you see in your browser
> as argument to the youtube-dl command (beware of special characters,
> better use "...", see man youtube-dl).
> This works also for other sites with movies.
>
>
> H

How very cool! I didn't know that existed.

Mark

>

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

#166365

On Mon 04 Apr 2016 at 08:42:17 (+0200), Jörg-Volker Peetz wrote:
> See package youtube-dl. Just give the URL you see in your browser
> as argument to the youtube-dl command (beware of special characters,
> better use "...", see man youtube-dl).
> This works also for other sites with movies.

Silly me. "get-youtube" is my bash function for youtube-dl and my
fingers just type it automatically. It has some extra logic, including
maintaining a history file to prevent accidently downloading the same
thing twice. "get-others" handles the other sites and shares the same
history file.

The history file is vital when you have, say, 300MB medleys with multiple
links pointing to them, like https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_6xmqAc9RE
which I might otherwise have downloaded seven times through the
different links.

Cheers,
David.

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

#166366

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Sun, 3 Apr 2016 23:12:41 -0500
David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> wrote:

> On Sun 03 Apr 2016 at 09:38:00 (+0300), Adam Wilson wrote:
> > On Fri, 1 Apr 2016 23:34:58 -0500 David Wright
> > <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> wrote:
> > > When flash streams a movie, a copy is downloaded somewhere on my
> > > disk. One beneficial effect of this is that if I click the slider
> > > to an earlier point in the movie, the player plays instantly from
> > > that point, without a wait for buffering. Is that the same with
> > > HTML5, or is it truly streaming (with no local copy on the disk)?
> > 
> > I'm not sure about this. Just because moving to an earlier point in
> > the stream resumes from that point instantly does not necessarily
> > mean that flash is downloading a local copy- I'm pretty sure flash
> > just keeps the entire stream in RAM, just like HTML5.
> > 
> > Either way, HTML5 does this too- you can instantly resume from an
> > already-buffered point.
> 
> No, flash writes a file. It doesn't take much ingenuity to find it.
> 
> Generally speaking with youtube, it's straightforward to find the
> 11-char string and use get-youtube to download the movie. With some
> other sites, it doesn't appear possible to get hold of a downloadable
> URL, so playing the movie and copying the flash file is the only way
> I know for downloading it.
> 
> I would prefer not to lose that ability through selecting HTML5
> merely because some people here say "Down with flash/Flash is dead".
> If HTML5 *does* keep the information in RAM as you say, then I'm
> stuck because I don't know how to find it or copy it. Can you help
> with this?

No. Since I don't use Flash, I know very little about how to use it,
and for that I apologise.

However, your original complaint was that you needed Flash to be able
to resume instantaneously from an earlier point in the video. Both
Flash and HTML5 players do this.

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

#166384

On Mon 04 Apr 2016 at 18:18:12 (+0300), Adam Wilson wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Apr 2016 23:12:41 -0500 David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> wrote:
> > On Sun 03 Apr 2016 at 09:38:00 (+0300), Adam Wilson wrote:
> > > On Fri, 1 Apr 2016 23:34:58 -0500 David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> wrote:
> > > > When flash streams a movie, a copy is downloaded somewhere on my
> > > > disk. One beneficial effect of this is that if I click the slider
> > > > to an earlier point in the movie, the player plays instantly from
> > > > that point, without a wait for buffering. Is that the same with
> > > > HTML5, or is it truly streaming (with no local copy on the disk)?
> > > 
> > > I'm not sure about this. Just because moving to an earlier point in
> > > the stream resumes from that point instantly does not necessarily
> > > mean that flash is downloading a local copy- I'm pretty sure flash
> > > just keeps the entire stream in RAM, just like HTML5.
> > > 
> > > Either way, HTML5 does this too- you can instantly resume from an
> > > already-buffered point.
> > 
> > No, flash writes a file. It doesn't take much ingenuity to find it.
> > 
> > Generally speaking with youtube, it's straightforward to find the
> > 11-char string and use get-youtube to download the movie. With some
> > other sites, it doesn't appear possible to get hold of a downloadable
> > URL, so playing the movie and copying the flash file is the only way
> > I know for downloading it.
> > 
> > I would prefer not to lose that ability through selecting HTML5
> > merely because some people here say "Down with flash/Flash is dead".
> > If HTML5 *does* keep the information in RAM as you say, then I'm
> > stuck because I don't know how to find it or copy it. Can you help
> > with this?
> 
> No. Since I don't use Flash, I know very little about how to use it,
> and for that I apologise.

No need to apologise about flash. *I'm* the one who knows about
flash. *You're* one of those exhorting us to switch to HTML5:
https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2016/04/msg00091.html
https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2016/04/msg00092.html
In fact, you appear to want enough people to boycott flash that it is
withdrawn and I'm forced to use something else, namely HTML5:
https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2016/03/msg00558.html
And your ally appears to want a faster resolution:
https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2016/03/msg00538.html

However, when I ask whether HTML5 can do something that I could do
with flash, then your answer is no, I can't help you. Fat lot of good
that is.

> However, your original complaint was that you needed Flash to be able
> to resume instantaneously from an earlier point in the video. Both
> Flash and HTML5 players do this.

No, I mentioned this as a benefit. It's a side-effect to flash's
writing the file mentioned in the previous sentence (the very first
sentence of the post). I want the file and with flash I can have it.
All I've learnt about HTML5 so far is that it keeps the entire stream
in RAM (allegedly, as you've presented no actual evidence that this is
the case).

It's obviously got to keep *some* of the stream in RAM or else it
couldn't play it, nor would you ever see any "buffering"
indication. That doesn't necessarily mean it's got all of it
in RAM at any one instant.

Cheers,
David.

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

#166389

> No, I mentioned this as a benefit. It's a side-effect to flash's
> writing the file mentioned in the previous sentence (the very first
> sentence of the post). I want the file and with flash I can have it.

My experience is the exact opposite: with HTML5 videos, I just
"right-click => Save Video as..." and it's done, whereas with Flash I am
not offered any option to save the video.

[ Using Gnash, indeed, there's a configuration variable about where to
  save the viewed videos, but it's not nearly as convenient, and Gnash
  fails more often than it works, for me.  ]


        Stefan

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

#166390

On Tuesday 05 April 2016 01:33:52 Stefan Monnier wrote:
> > No, I mentioned this as a benefit. It's a side-effect to flash's
> > writing the file mentioned in the previous sentence (the very first
> > sentence of the post). I want the file and with flash I can have it.
>
> My experience is the exact opposite: with HTML5 videos, I just
> "right-click => Save Video as..." and it's done, whereas with Flash I am
> not offered any option to save the video.

Which browser?  I don't get this!

Lisi

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

#166391

>> > No, I mentioned this as a benefit. It's a side-effect to flash's
>> > writing the file mentioned in the previous sentence (the very first
>> > sentence of the post). I want the file and with flash I can have it.
>> My experience is the exact opposite: with HTML5 videos, I just
>> "right-click => Save Video as..." and it's done, whereas with Flash I am
>> not offered any option to save the video.
> Which browser?

Iceweasel,

> I don't get this!

Maybe it depends on the web-site?  I don't watch web videos very often, but
it's worked for me the few times I needed it.


        Stefan

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

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web