PepperFlash .PETs

Browsers, email, chat, etc.
Message
Author
User avatar
Mike Walsh
Posts: 6351
Joined: Sat 28 Jun 2014, 12:42
Location: King's Lynn, UK.

#21 Post by Mike Walsh »

Evening, all.

The 32-bit Chrome PepperFlash .pet is now FIXED. Quite simply, it was my own fault; I made the elementary mistake of naming the PepperFlash folder 'Pepperflash' (small 'f' where I should have used a capital 'F') during construction.

This is why two folders were being created; they were named slightly differently, so Puppy was treating them as different folders. Apologies for this; anybody who's downloaded this .pet during the last 48 hours or so, please uninstall it, download again, and re-install again. This time, it will work the way it was supposed to...! :oops:

Thanks for your patience. :) It's been a bit of a 'learning curve' for me! :lol: I really must learn to watch my syntax.


Mike. :wink:

User avatar
Mike Walsh
Posts: 6351
Joined: Sat 28 Jun 2014, 12:42
Location: King's Lynn, UK.

#22 Post by Mike Walsh »

**PepperFlash Update:-**

Hallo again, everybody.

It looks as though the PepperFlash .pets won't be as comprehensive from now on as I had hoped.....in large part due to the fact that I started providing them right at the very end of Adobe's 32-bit PepperFlash run.

Since Google have now dropped support for 32-bit Chrome on Linux, as well as Windows XP & Vista, it appears that 21.0.0.213 will be the very last 32-bit release of PepperFlash for Linux.. After this, it will be only the 64-bit version that will be updated. Some will say this is a good thing; that the march of technology doesn't stop for anyone, and that those of us using 32-bit systems should move onward to 64-bit hardware.

For a lot of people, this is simply not practical, due to financial/social constraints, etc., and this is being noised abroad (quite vocally, I should say) as a very mean move on Google's part (given that apparently Chrome is the world's most popular browser). You can, of course, continue to use 32-bit FireFox, which utilises the standard FlashPlayer (11.2.202.xxx).....although Adobe will be dropping support for this in about a year's time.

This kinda presupposes that HTML5 will be dominant, 12 months down the road. Either that, or Adobe are giving web developers enough rope to hang themselves.....and any who don't pull their finger out and make the necessary changes to websites under their care will be caught flat-footed; sites requiring media content after Flash support folds for good will have no recourse but to upgrade.....and fast.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I will continue to supply the updated 64-bit version as a .pet, for the same browsers as in the main post.


21.0.0.213 (last for 32-bit) will continue to be available from the original links.


Mike. :wink:
Last edited by Mike Walsh on Fri 13 Jan 2017, 17:20, edited 12 times in total.

Sylvander
Posts: 4416
Joined: Mon 15 Dec 2008, 11:06
Location: West Lothian, Scotland, UK

#23 Post by Sylvander »

I have Slimjet-9.0.0.0 installed in Slacko-5.7.0-pae [32-bit on 64-bit hardware], so...

I installed Slimjet-PepperFlash-21.0.0.213-i386.pet, and the version checked OK at http://www.adobe.com/uk/software/flash/about/ [when I went there using Slimjet-9.0.0.0].

I won't save the changes.
Will wait for a response first.

User avatar
Mike Walsh
Posts: 6351
Joined: Sat 28 Jun 2014, 12:42
Location: King's Lynn, UK.

#24 Post by Mike Walsh »

Hi, Sylvander.

Glad to hear it's working for you. I did test them in as many different browsers as I could before uploading them, so they ought to behave themselves.

Yes, I'm afraid 32-bit Pepper has reached the end of the road, With Google no longer supporting 32-bit Chrome, Adobe have no more incentive to develop 32-bit Pepper any further. But it is rather unfair on the millions of people who, for whatever reason, can't move to 64-bit systems and stuff.....mainly for financial reasons, or because of their social situation.

I'm going to continue on with the 64-bit .pets, anyhow. It's astonishing how many people are still using older browsers; these are the ones for whom I envisaged the use of these .pets when I constructed them. I myself still use Chromium 36 some of the time; at least a more up-to-date Pepper makes it a wee bit safer!


Mike. :wink:
Last edited by Mike Walsh on Tue 17 May 2016, 03:16, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Mike Walsh
Posts: 6351
Joined: Sat 28 Jun 2014, 12:42
Location: King's Lynn, UK.

#25 Post by Mike Walsh »

Morning, all.

For anybody who happens to have the 64-bit version of SlimJet running on their system, the SlimJet64 PepperFlash .pet is also now available (see above for link). I installed SlimJet64 into Lighthouse64 'Mariner' Edition earlier this evening, extracting from the supplied tar.xz tarball.....and performing a wee bit of command-line 'tinkering'. For anyone who might be interested in the how-to, I'll soon be posting a tutorial on the subject..! :)

Watch this sub-forum...


Mike. :wink:

User avatar
Mike Walsh
Posts: 6351
Joined: Sat 28 Jun 2014, 12:42
Location: King's Lynn, UK.

#26 Post by Mike Walsh »

***NEW VERSION***

64-bit version 22.0.0.192 now available. Links as above.

Any probs, let me know. I don't anticipate any.


Mike. :wink:
Last edited by Mike Walsh on Tue 13 Sep 2016, 15:42, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Mike Walsh
Posts: 6351
Joined: Sat 28 Jun 2014, 12:42
Location: King's Lynn, UK.

#27 Post by Mike Walsh »

***NEW VERSION***

64-bit version 22.0.0.209 now available. Links as above.

Any probs, as always, let me know.


Mike. :wink:
Last edited by Mike Walsh on Tue 13 Sep 2016, 15:43, edited 1 time in total.

Belham

#28 Post by Belham »

Mike,

Thanks for the latest Chrome/Chromium Adobe Flash update to .209.

You having any luck (if you still use FF or Palemoon or Seamoney) getting any Puppy-related distro to accept the 11.2.202.632 for Linux Flash Player Update? None of the scripts work (Adobe changed their website again, maybe?) and manually trying to download .632 and insert the LGPL & .so file into the /usr/bin/mozilla/plugin/ folder is a no-go.

I still use FF (and Palemoon) occasionally on some Pups, but they are dead-in-the-water until I can get this stupid flashplayer updated. I cannot wait until every single last website in the world ditches the workings of their websites require adobe flash. Hard to understand how something so vulnerable is continued to be required to get certain sites to work. it's embarrassing for the worldwide web & its users overall :(

Thanks for anything you might find and/or get to work.

[EDIT: ok, the above method still works when you're updating adobe flash. For some reason, when I downloaded 11.2.202.632 for Linux, when it un-archived, it named the .so file as "libpepflashplayer.so". I still don't quite know how and/or why this happened, but the flashplayer.so you want is "libflashplayer.so". So, i went to another linux-distro I like to use (Peppermint 7), grabbed the libflashplayer.so from it (aas it has the new .632 .so), copied it over to the various Puppies /mozilla/plugins/ folder, and voila', all of the four puppies I use have the latest 11.2.202.632 flash player. hope this helps someone out there if they run into what I did.]

User avatar
Mike Walsh
Posts: 6351
Joined: Sat 28 Jun 2014, 12:42
Location: King's Lynn, UK.

#29 Post by Mike Walsh »

Hi, Belham.

Heh. Yup, this has only just happened this last 48 hours or so. I run Geoffrey's 'auto-updater' script he put together for the Linux Flashplayer ('libflashplayer.so' - trusty old 11.2.202.xxx):-

http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=100523

Although I've just noticed you've posted in that today, too: so..... To cut a long story short, it's been giving me the version number for the current Pepperflash the last day or so; which is weird. I'd guess Adobe have been swapping URLs around again, 'cos the situation is now the opposite of what it used to be. Used to be you could get the FF NPAPI version, but not PepperFlash's PPAPI; now you can get PPAPI, but not NPAPI.

However, it doesn't download it, because I think Geoff's written his script to look for an exact name match before downloading.....and 'libpepflashplayer.so' is not the same as 'libflashplayer.so'. Ergo, it won't complete the script.

But I'm not going to look a gift horse in the mouth; while it's available, I'm going to make use of it..! I'm going to be knocking out some more 32-bit PepperFlash .pets before too long.

My guess is that with Google dropping 32-bit Chrome, with which PepperFlash was so closely tied, some contract or another is now terminated, so Adobe are free to release it for general use (Chromium 32-bit development is still going strong, and that's where the Pepper API originated, of course; and there's a lot of Chromium-based browsers out there; Slimjet, Vivaldi and Iron to name just a few.)

But the way you've 'appropriated' it, that is one way to do it; it'll work for the NPAPI version as well as it will for the PPAPI version. These things are platform-agnostic, in the sense that they're not tied to any specific Linux kernel version. They'll run under any of them. So grab 'em from anywhere you can. It doesn't matter where, as long as the version is the one you want.

BTW; You did realise that to get the NPAPI version, you need to visit the download page actually in FF, or one of the FF-related browsers? To get Pepper offered, visit the page in one of the Chrome/Chromium-based browsers. The page offers the correct version, based on the user-agent string it detects from your browser.

Edit:- Just downloaded from the d/l page in FF ESR 38. Shut FF down. Extracted the 'libflashplayer.so'. Opened /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins. Renamed the one already there as libflashplayer.so.bak; this way you can revert by removing the 'bak' from the end. Moved it over. Opened FF again, and went to the 'checker' page. Result?

'11.2.202.632'

There's another more direct checker you can use, actually. It's listed near the bottom of the first post in this thread:-

https://www.adobe.com/swf/software/flas ... _small.swf

This just shows the version you're currently using, not the whole list of all the different browser and OS versions. In nice, BIG letters, so you can't miss it..! :lol:


Mike. :wink:

Belham

#30 Post by Belham »

Hi Mike,

Thanks for confirming. I did know that whichever flash download pops up on Adobe's page depends on the browser. I just checked again, re-downloaded the 11.2.202.632 for Linux (using FF 47.01), I un-archived it, and I'll be danged, there sits again the "libpepflashplayer.so" that unarchiving made. Going to go into "about:config" and see if I did something to cause this. I use the latest versions of FF for security reasons, but boy when I set them up, I go into "about:config" and just murder a lot of stuff (setting it to "false", or replacing URLs, or just disabling truly idiotic stuff). I've always used FF to download, so maybe the last update of theirs changed settings in my json file or prefs.js files.

Thanks again for responding. I for one cannot wait for the day when I don't have to worry about Flash at all. I do live without it on a couple of my old machines, but on the main daily driver, there are still some websites that I like to frequent & read, and they require flash. Ugh :roll:

User avatar
Mike Walsh
Posts: 6351
Joined: Sat 28 Jun 2014, 12:42
Location: King's Lynn, UK.

#31 Post by Mike Walsh »

Hey, Belham.

Just out of curiosity, what are you using to 'un-archive' with? I'm asking because I use a utility by don570 he calls his 'right-click' .pet. Once installed, the right-click context menu on any file will show a number of small utilities considered to be useful for that particular file-type.

It's one of the handiest things I've ever installed.....and one of the things it includes is UExtract. This thing beats X-Archiver hands-down, no discredit to whoever wrote X-Archiver, that's just how it is..!

Link is here, if you're interested:-

It seems like nothing happens when you install (except for a yellow window that comes up in a foreign language - French, I think - but it's easy enough to follow. You need to click OK to finish the install.) You don't see anything at all.....until you right-click on something. Then you see what it's all about.

Highly recommended, if you fancy having several very useful little utilities at your fingertips, instead of searching through the various sub-menus to find them.

You sound like a veteran with FF. It's only ever been a 'back-up' browser for me.....so I've never really dug around 'under the hood', as it were. Couldn't tell you half of what it's capable of. I tried the 'beta' release of Chrome, back in summer 2008, and I was hooked instantly. Used it as my main browser pretty much ever since; that, or Chromium. Like all browsers, however, it's bloated over the years.... :lol:

I'm in Precise 571 right now, running Chromium 36.0.1985.143, from 2 1/2 years ago.....with 32-bit Pepper 22.0.0.209, released yesterday!

Installed LupuSuper2 a couple of months ago. The newest Chrome that'll run there is 26.....the glibc won't support anything newer. Jeezus H.... I'd forgotten just how blisteringly fast Chrome used to be in the early days....and why I liked it so much. It's got a lot to do with the sand-boxing they use nowadays; it's much 'heavier' and more 'aggressive' than it used to be; the need for it probably driven by all the nasties out there in 'never-never land'..!


Mike. :wink:

Belham

#32 Post by Belham »

Hi Mike,

Yeah, I either use UExtract or X-archiver. For the past six months, I've mainly stuck to the four pup distros of Fatdog, Tahr, Quirky8.0 and DebianDog---all 64-bit. I wanted to force myself to do this, because I knew eventually I'd have to say goodbye to 32-bit. Them stinkers at Google actually gave me the push when they nixed 32-bit Chrome (I used Chrome to watch Netflix, which weirdly I haven't watched in a long time because I binged on everything it had the first 3 months, haha).

But I gotta tell ya, I miss 32-bit when specifically talking about anything related to the pups. As I have---how do I say this nicely without my machines getting all worked up & thus starting to pull voodoo stuff on me :? ----I have slightly...ummmm...cough, cough, older machines. I remember you do too :D For mine, it's not the newest stuff, but equally it's also not the oldest. I do have some old Pentiums and AMDs (and the still functioning motherboards and memory--from the early-to-mid 1990s, but my wife made me give those up because of the noise-racket they make when I am booting 'em up, with loud IDEs attached, a PSU that sounds like a Suburu's in the driveway, and well, you get the drift. Basically what I am trying to say is that I don't care what anyone tells me about 64-bit being the future and blah, blah, blah (yes, I know it is, that's why I am making myself go there & stay), but puppies in 32-bit versions just stinking fly compared to 64-bit when on a reasonable system.

This "flying" really hit me like an anvil one day when I was talking with 8Geee (on the murga-forums here back in March or thereabouts), and I noticed he had put up his own Precise 5.7 32-bit version. Since I was a longtime fan of Precise 5.7, what caught my eye was he stuck to FF27. I thought, ok, what the heck, I've been using 64-bit pups for about 4 months now, so as a treat, I download his 5.7 version to have some old memories, and then told myself I would delete it after a few days of fun.

After downloading and installing it, it was, as you aptly describe, a full-on "JeezusH-MotherHe!!" moment for me. I mean, I had forgotten. Before I even got my finger off the mouse click of opening FF267 (8Geee whacks at FF like I do, changing a lot of stuff in its config files)...but before I even got my finger off the mouse, FF27 popped up on my screen like some meerkat on steroids. It was so fast that for a second I thought I did something wrong, lol.

I don't know, maybe if I ever get new motherboards and new chips, any of the 64-bit stuff I use will do the same. But it is hard to throw away machines running Athon II X2 Regors, with a decent amount of ram, good, sturdy motherboards, when they still can run quite well (I'm a non-gamer) for my needs. even my 6-8 year old laptops still do quite well. I'm not saying 64-bit pups are slow, it is just when putting them beside a 32-bit, on my machines, they will get left in the dust easily. Heck, my old rigs still even run well when I've got to Handbrake a video or two one of the family members has created.

Oh well, I've gotta stop talking about 32-bit, otherwise I am going to convince myself to unlearn that past 6 months, ditch everything, and go back to Precise 5.7 and LxPup (or the recent XenialPup that I am REALLY trying hard, lol, to ignore every time I log into murga).

Hey, thanks for the link to the archiver...right clicking to pick what we want sounds great. I'll give it a whirl and see if I can get it running on one of the 64-bit pup systems. also, I'm still goofing around with SlimJet. I like having diff browsers for diff purposes (and even diff websites) :D

User avatar
Mike Walsh
Posts: 6351
Joined: Sat 28 Jun 2014, 12:42
Location: King's Lynn, UK.

#33 Post by Mike Walsh »

Hi again, Belham.

'Right-click' pet does work on the 64-bit Pups; it certainly does in Tahr64 and Slacko64. Talking of which, I'm glad I stuck at it with Slacko64.....it really is shaping up to be the spiritual successor to 570.

Like you, I'm not a 'gamer'; graphic design has been my hobby for decades. I used to do everything by hand in the early days; when computing began to be capable of handling vector graphics, it was so much easier to do that stuff on one of these things; you could chop and change to your heart's content.

I run WINE in my Pups, mainly for two graphics apps; Mooi's 'PhotoScape', and Adobe's CS2 Photoshop. It's a very old version, but still a highly capable piece of kit. There was a lot of excitement around a couple of years ago, when Adobe were finally shutting down the CS2 activation servers for good; for a short period, you were able to get hold of it for free (which, for Adobe, was unheard of..!), by pulling a stunt to register for an account, making them think you were a professional who'd 'mislaid' their copy, and wanted to re-install. They provided not only the download, but even the activation key (which, like an MS activation key, was the bit that you actually paid through the nose for). I think MS got the idea for the subscription model from Adobe, who moved to it quite some years ago. It certainly hasn't upset their balance sheet to any noticeable degree.

I'd fancied a copy of Photoshop for a long time, but honestly, their prices were eye-watering; I don't use it like some people do, just for mucking around and 'Photoshopping' images to fool other people. I actually use it for serious image work, alongside the GIMP (they're not so very different, really), so I grabbed the chance with both hands. I'm a big believer in the principle that everybody should have access to good-quality, free software.... :D

I then found an article on OMG! Ubuntu, about how to get it to run in WINE. I spent a couple of days tracking down all the necessary components, and a specific version of WINE (1.7.51), put it all together, and....well. It actually runs faster in Puppy under WINE than it ever did in XP; and absolutely everything works, too! I was well chuffed.

I've used Mooi's 'PhotoScape' since it, too, was in beta, back in early 2009. I've got so handy with it, that I can't imagine not having it around....and it also runs flawlessly under this particular version of WINE. I've got both installed in all my Pups (a mixture of 32's and 64's), so that it doesn't matter which one I boot into (usually a case of 'Eeny,meeny,miny, mo...'; no, seriously!) :lol: , I can just get on with whatever the current project is, since all my files are on separate data partitions, sym-linked into every Pup's /root folder. It's a good set-up. I use PhotoScape for roughing-out a project, before switching to either Photoshop or the GIMP, to put some 'meat on the bones'. They each have unique features that the other lacks.

Anyway, I couldn't get WINE to configure its /root/.wine folder; until you do, it's useless. Took me a while to realise that 64-bit WINE has not only /usr/bin/wine/winecfg, but /usr/bin/wine64/winecfg. That's all that was holding me up. Old 32-bit Puppy habits die hard! :roll: :lol:

That's what I like about Puppy. My hardware is all elderly, but built like a brick outhouse. I mean, this stuff was intended to last; especially the Compaq, which is a genuine Compaq business machine, made just before HP got their grubby hands on them, and relegated them to a product label in their line-up.....a sad ending for a firm which had an unassailable reputation among the business community for sturdy, long-lasting, innovative machinery which was 100% reliable. Ç'est là vie, I'm afraid.

And on here, the 32-bit Pups are so responsive, and so fast, it's almost unreal. Even the 64-bit Pups, while not quite so fast, are even smoother. like a deliciously thick, creamy cappucino. (Sorry, I'm getting carried away now..!) :lol:

I shall keep using this old girl as long as I possibly can. It belonged to my sister, who Ebay'd with it, and played 'The Sims'. And that's all she did for over 10 years. It had a very gentle life. I've seriously upgraded most of the hardware this last 18 months or so, including swapping the single-core Athlon 64 for an X2....which made a huge difference. Puppy multitasks now like nothing else I've ever come across before....or since!

The now-departed Mikeb (late of these Forums) used to say that a well-fettled Puppy was exactly how a properly set-up XP should be.....and that the kindest thing you could do to XP was abort the update mechanism at birth! Update everything manually; get it set-up the way you wanted it....then just leave it the hell alone from then on. And it should 'tick-over' like a well-oiled pocket watch.....

It's all good fun, ain't it?


Mike. :wink:

User avatar
Mike Walsh
Posts: 6351
Joined: Sat 28 Jun 2014, 12:42
Location: King's Lynn, UK.

#34 Post by Mike Walsh »

***ATTENTION***

Apparently, the new version of Chrome released yesterday (Jun 20th), has fixed a 'Sandbox escape' by PepperFlash. For this reason, I would urge anybody using the current version of 22.0.0.209 (64-bit) to re-install the 64-bit version of Pepper. This only applies to Chrome.

I've re-uploaded the 64-bit .pet for Chrome.


Mike. :wink:

User avatar
Mike Walsh
Posts: 6351
Joined: Sat 28 Jun 2014, 12:42
Location: King's Lynn, UK.

#35 Post by Mike Walsh »

***NEW VERSION***

32 & 64-bit versions of 23.0.0.162 are now available. Link as above, in post #1.

Any probs, as always, let me know.


Mike. :wink:

User avatar
Mike Walsh
Posts: 6351
Joined: Sat 28 Jun 2014, 12:42
Location: King's Lynn, UK.

#36 Post by Mike Walsh »

***NEW VERSION***

32 & 64-bit versions of 23.0.0.185 are now available. Link as above, in post #1. Help yourselves as usual.

Any probs, you know where to find me.


Mike. :wink:

User avatar
Mike Walsh
Posts: 6351
Joined: Sat 28 Jun 2014, 12:42
Location: King's Lynn, UK.

#37 Post by Mike Walsh »

***NEW VERSION***

Puppians are advised to update Pepper as soon as they can; this release fixes a super-critical vulnerability.

32 & 64-bit versions of 23.0.0.205 are now available. Link as above, in post #1. Help yourselves as normal.

Any probs, you can always give me a shout. Remember, for anybody using it, my 32-bit version of SlimJet takes the same PepperFlash .pet as Oscar's Tahrpup version...placing it in /opt/google/slimjet/PepperFlash.

Anybody needing to upgrade in Chrome54 onwards, you don't need a .pet.....it's now handled internally by the browser's built-in updater, and should occur automatically. See the Chrome SFS thread for details.


Mike. :wink:

User avatar
Mike Walsh
Posts: 6351
Joined: Sat 28 Jun 2014, 12:42
Location: King's Lynn, UK.

#38 Post by Mike Walsh »

***NEW VERSION***

Evening, all.

32 & 64-bit versions of 23.0.0.207 are now available. Link as above, in post #1. Help yourselves as usual.

Any probs, give me a shout. Remember, for anybody using it, my 32-bit version of SlimJet takes the same PepperFlash .pet as Oscar's Tahrpup version...placing it in /opt/google/slimjet/PepperFlash.

Anybody needing to upgrade in Chrome54 onwards, you don't need a .pet.....it's now handled internally by the browser's built-in updater, and should occur automatically. See the Chrome SFS thread for details.


Mike. :wink:

User avatar
Mike Walsh
Posts: 6351
Joined: Sat 28 Jun 2014, 12:42
Location: King's Lynn, UK.

#39 Post by Mike Walsh »

***NEW VERSION***

Evening, all.

32 & 64-bit versions of 24.0.0.186 are now available. Link as above, in post #1. Help yourselves as usual.

Any problems, you know where I am. Remember, for anybody using it, my 32-bit version of SlimJet takes the same PepperFlash .pet as Oscar's Tahrpup version...placing it in /opt/google/slimjet/PepperFlash.

Anybody needing to upgrade in Chrome 54 onwards, you don't need a .pet.....it's now handled internally by the browser's built-in updater, and will upgrade all by itself. :) See the Chrome SFS thread for details.


Mike. :wink:

User avatar
Mike Walsh
Posts: 6351
Joined: Sat 28 Jun 2014, 12:42
Location: King's Lynn, UK.

#40 Post by Mike Walsh »

***NEW VERSION***

Morning, everybody.

32 & 64-bit versions of 24.0.0.194 are now available. Link as usual in post #1. Pick out what you need, as normal.

There is now a .pet available to upgrade Pepper in 64-bit Iron.

Any problems, you know where to find me. Don't forget, for anybody using it, my 32-bit version of SlimJet takes the same PepperFlash .pet as Oscar's Tahrpup version...placing it in /opt/google/slimjet/PepperFlash.

No need to manually upgrade in Chrome from version 54 onwards.....it's now handled internally by the browser's built-in updater, and will upgrade all by itself. :) See the Chrome SFS thread for details.

Enjoy.


Mike. :wink:

Post Reply