Main menu:


Please consider a small donation:



Or you can donate bitcoin:


Thanks to TekLinks in Birmingham, AL, for providing colocation and bandwidth.

Page Rank


FOSS Force Best Blog--2013 Award

Recent posts

Recent comments

About this blog

I am Eric Hameleers, and this is where I think out loud.
More about me.


Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 425 other subscribers

My Favourites



April 2019
« Mar    

RSS Alien's Slackware packages

RSS Alien's unofficial KDE Slackware packages

RSS Alien's multilib packages

RSS Slackware64-current



Security update: flashplayer-plugin

adobe_flash_8s600x600_2 I have been feeling less than optimal during the past week because of all the changes at work (new outsourcing deal to be executed) and the lack of good sleep due to the local high temperatures (Even at night). Today I decided to keep the doors to the outside world shut (a new week with predicted temperatures upward from 30 degrees centigrade has started) and work a bit on package maintenance.

After uploading some bugfixes in my KDE 4.11 RC1 package set, I noticed that there was a new security release of the FlashPlayer plugin. I have updated my Flash Player packages to version right away!

After upgrading, use the following URL to check that you are indeed running the latest version of the Flash Player plugin: .

Have fun! Eric



Comment from Ricardo Klein
Posted: July 22, 2013 at 14:40

you should name your package as the same on
your repo: flashplayer-plugin
sbo: flash-player-plugin

Comment from alienbob
Posted: July 22, 2013 at 20:09

Ricardo, I should not do such a thing at all.

I have this package in my repository since 2008, I have no urge to change the name all of a sudden. Let SBo change its name then!

Adobe itself uses the program name “flashplayer”, not “flash-player” in every URL which mentions it, like – so my package name follows upstream more closely.


Comment from Ricardo Klein
Posted: July 22, 2013 at 20:19

ok, I just thought about that because rworkman is the maintainer of this package on SBo and I thought you guys talk each other a lot.
My point is just that with same name things should be easy when upgrading from your repo or SBo, but I agree with you that your package name follows upstream more closely and it is the right to go.
BTW I will try to talk with him about this too.

Comment from Geovanni
Posted: July 31, 2013 at 23:10

Eric, Since the chrome has the updated flash plugin, isn’t there a way to get flash’s chrome plugin to work on Firefox?

Write a comment