On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 8:55 AM, Evan Martin <e...@chromium.org> wrote:
> We de-duplicate multiple instances of the same file. If you have
> multiple copies of the same file we attempt to prioritize
> non-nspluginwrapper versions over nspluginwrapper-wrapped versions.
> After that, the list of plugins displayed is not the list of plugins
> that are *loaded* -- we only actually plugins in a per-plugin process,
> and only the first match, so having multiple libflashplayer.so should
> be fine.
Hmm. Maybe I should try to re-create my setup, then. When I had the
10.x player in /usr/whatever and the 7.x player in ~/.mozilla/plugins
(*), things like Google Finance would tell me to get flash to get the
interactive graphs, and I'd get a LOT of plug-in-crashed infobars.
When I removed the ~/.mozilla/plugins .so and restarted Chrome, Google
Finance started showing me the whizzy graphs.
(*) libflashplayer.so dated 2004-08-03. Yeah, I've surely been haxor'ed.
[I don't know how relevant it is, but I used many versions of Firefox
for years on this system, and have never felt excessively held back by
flash. Don't get me wrong, less reliable than I'd have liked, but I
cobbled together the system out of individual atoms found in my
backyard, so I expected it to lack polish.]
-scott
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Chromium Developers mailing list: chromium-dev@googlegroups.com
View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe:
http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
