Where is 64-bit Linux support for Flash Player?

I run 32-bit Linux but there is a very vocal group of people who really want 64-bit Linux support for Flash Player. Today there is a decent work around for running the 32-bit Flash Player on a 64-bit Linux system using the nspluginwrapper. From what I’ve heard it works fairly well on most distro’s but I haven’t heard yet how well it works with the new Flash Player 10 beta. Despite this potential work around eventually Adobe does need to natively support 64-bit Linux – and they will. This is not as simple as a recompile – otherwise there would be 64-bit support today. There is a bug already filed in the public Flash Player bug database for 64-bit support. I’d encourage you to not just go vote for that bug but also to get involved. As Tinic Uro points out in the bug comments, the missing piece for 64-bit support is open source – so you can help! Flash Player uses the open source Mozilla Tamarin VM. This VM does not yet support 64-bit Linux because all that machine code generation in the JIT compiler needs to be ported from 32-bit to 64-bit. The code is in Mozilla’s Tamarin Central Mercurial repo. This IS open source! You can help get 64-bit Linux support for Flash Player!

This entry was posted in Flash Player, Linux, Tamarin. Bookmark the permalink. Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.
  • Pingback: Tech Per » Blog Archive » 64bit Flash Player on Linux - Do It Yourself

  • Dean Hilkewich

    Same Adobe crap, honestly, Adobe is probably the most pathetic company for fixing bugs. Only Adobe can put out a plug-in that can’t even render their bloody website correctly.

    http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c3…gSinceVer7.jpg

    Still no 64-bit support despite it being out for 7 years. They use obsolete frameworks and then point fingers at Apple. They bring out a non-native x86 OS X version of CS2 despite having YEARS of advanced notice of Apple intent and never bring out a native binary for CS2 on the OSX86. Instead they screw people over by making them purchase a CS3 upgrade just so they can run it natively AND STILL BUILD IT ON A DEPRECIATED FRAMEWORK!

    I really truly hope silverlight becomes the new web standard. At least it’s open and truly crossplatform and already supports 64-bit.

  • http://www.jamesward.org James Ward

    Hi Dean,

    Have you tried nspluginwrapper? I’m curious to hear about your experiences. Also can you explain what you mean when you say that Silverlight is open and truly crossplatform?

    Thanks.

    -James

  • http://www.jamesward.org James Ward

    Also Dean, that Photobucket link doesn’t seem to be working for me. Can you file a Flash Player bug and attach the image? Thanks.

    -James

  • Dean Hilkewich

    Yes I have nswrapper installed and configured correctly. It’s a bandaid solution that breaks frequently with updates to flash and/or various browsers.
    Here is the link to the old bug with photobucket. For some reason it truncated itself.

    http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c316/deanjo/SameFnBugSinceVer7.jpg

    I’m not filing a new bug report as this bug has been around for YEARS and the response from adobe was “We can’t fix that”

    As far as silverlight goes it’s readily available for Win / OS X and linux. The linux plugin is opensource and compile’s cleanly on a pure 64-bit system, no bandaid needed (not to mention 1000 times more stable then ANY version of the linux version of flashplayer.

    http://www.mono-project.com/Moonlight

  • http://www.jamesward.org James Ward

    Hi Dean,

    No need to file that bug since it has actually been fixed! It required fixes to FP and Firefox. So you will need FP 10 and Firefox 3.

    -James

  • Dean Hilkewich

    Oh really? That’s funny since I’m running the latest FF3 build and FP10.

  • http://www.jamesward.org James Ward

    Whoops. You are right. I have an internal build that has this fixed. I thought the fix made it into the beta – but I guess not. Which means you can expect it in the next release.

    -James

  • Dean Hilkewich

    And what about konqueror, opera and any webkit based browser?

  • http://www.jamesward.org James Ward

    Any browser that supports XEmbed should work. FF 3 does but I don’t know about the others.

    -James

  • Dean Hilkewich

    Maybe that should be looked into since FF 4 is based on webkit and is dropping the GTK dependencies.

  • http://thedaneshproject.com Danny

    native support for 64bit Flash. Been waiting for that for a long time.

  • http://neverfollow.blogspot.com Devang

    Can I put nspluginwrapper bugs in the flash bugzilla? nspluginwrapper doesn’t work on a grsec kernel:

    nspluginwrapper -i /usr/lib/nsbrowser/libflashplayer.so
    *** NSPlugin Viewer *** ERROR: /usr/lib/nsbrowser/libflashplayer.so: cannot make segment writable for relocation: Permission denied
    nspluginwrapper: no appropriate viewer found for /usr/lib/nsbrowser/libflashplayer.so

  • http://www.grindstonemedia.net ryan

    hey dean, i would like to say that i do understand your frustration and respect and acknowledge that you have certainly raised a very important issue that needs to be solved as quickly as possible. I am absolutely astounded to read that you think that silverlight would be an open platform:

    “I really truly hope silverlight becomes the new web standard. At least it’s open and truly crossplatform and already supports 64-bit.”

    Dude take a closer look at tamarin: http://www.mozilla.org/projects/tamarin/ and quite whining because the past is over…

  • http://www.jamesward.org James Ward

    Hi Devang,

    That seems like a nsplugnwrapper bug not a Flash Player bug. I’d probably start with filing that bug with the nspluginwrapper.

    -James

  • http://mstrcdr.com fabrice a.

    More than support for the FP X on linux 64b I am looking forward for full 64b support and the same set of features you have on XP/OSX in Flex Builder 3. It’s unacceptable for me to have to install a 32b tool chain (jre, eclipse, firefox…) when I already have a native 64b version all these applications installed on my machine. For now I have to rely on qemu to run the FB3 on XP but that comes its own problems when you play with things like webcam recording…

    f.

  • http://www.jamesward.org James Ward

    Hi fabrice,

    I don’t think you need to install the whole 32-bit tool chain to use nspluginwrapper. Try it and let me know what you find.

    -James

  • Pepe Deluxe

    Adobe also needs to desperately roll out a Windows x64 Flash Player.

    Still, if Adobe is happy to lose the foothold that Flash gained while Macromedia was still in charge, that’s fine by me. I’m sure some emerging web technology with open standards will take its place.

    What a shame for all those Flash developers being swindled out of thousands of dollars for tools by Adobe though, given their creations won’t be viewable on faster, x64 bit browsers that ship not only with Linux, but XP x64 and Vista x64.

    To say the situation is a disgrace is understatement of the year. Adobe SHOULD have the resources to aim at this problem, given the money it charges for Flash development products.

  • Pingback: pelzel.de » Blog Archiv » Fedora 9 x86_64

  • http://kopete.kde.org/team.php Cláudio da Silveira Pinheiro

    Hello, James. This text is directed to Mike Melanson, but I’m not sure he’ll allow my comment on Penguin.SWF, so maybe you’ll only see this if I post it here. Please take a look at it and help us from our “vocal group of people who really want 64-bit Linux”.

    Argh!
    No 64-bit native, and now no 32-bit nspluginwrapper, neither 32-bit firefox on 64-bit platform anymore, as libflashplayer.so depends on

    libcurl.so.3
    libssl3.so
    libnss3.so
    libnspr4.so

    , that can be found in packages

    libcurl3
    libnspr4-dev
    libnss3-dev

    Heh. These in turn depend on

    libcomerr2
    libidn11
    libkrb53
    libldap
    libnss3-1d
    libsqlite3
    libssl0.9.8
    zlib1g

    that in their turn depend on

    debconf
    libgnutls13
    libkeyutils1
    libsasl2

    that in their turn depend on

    debconf-i18n
    libdb4.6
    libgcrypt11
    liblzo2-2
    libopencdk10
    libsasl2-modules
    libtasn1-2
    perl-base

    that in their turn depend on other multitude of libraries I’ll not dig deeper because it became pretty obvious there are just too many of them, that it would be easier to run a 32-bit O.S., and having to install all the dependencies in a 64-bit O.S. would mean my ‘puter would spend some hundreds of MB just to load a cute Flash-based banner ad.
    If Flash 10 final has this little dependency problem, it will be simply a nightmarish task for Fedora, Mandriva, openSUSE, (*)Ubuntu and all other distos who offer a 64-bit version of their OSes, to package it.
    Man, you did it.
    It was a punch below the waistline.
    Mike, you can do better than this. There’s no need to worsen 64-bit users’ lives, even less this way. If before we could at least awkwardly use Flash content, rc1 just alienated us in such an absurd way I really struggle to understand why a developer would go such great lenghts to accomplish it. I’m not saying you did it on purpose, but you hit the mark nonetheless.
    Please take a moment to think about it, and I hope you’ll realize you can’t disregard so many people, at least not morally.
    I really hope you personally will work out this situation in a reasonable way.

    Best regards.

  • http://www.jamesward.org James Ward

    Hi Cláudio,

    Thanks for your comment. So I guess you are saying that nspluginwrapper does not do the trick with FP 10 rc1? Is there any way to fix that without having 32bit libs for all the library deps? When I tried FP 9 and nspluginwrapper a long time ago I don’t remember having to install all of the 32-bit lib deps.

    Have you voted for the bug yet? Please do.

    Have you looked at Tamarin to see if you can help get native 64-bit working?

    -James

  • http://kopete.kde.org/team.php Cláudio da Silveira Pinheiro

    Yeah, what I’m saying is exactly it: nspluginwrapper desn’t do the trick for FP 10 rc1 because of the sudden growth of the dependency chain.
    There’s a way to fix this situation without having 32bit libs for all library dependencies: Releasing a friggin’ native 64-bit FP 10. :D
    FP 9 is way more self-contained. Even the previous beta (that one with stray pixels garbling video streams) can be run just fine in a 64-bit system with the wrapper (running “fine” meaning it runs despite having to load a full 32-bit libc6 to memory and all the 32-64-32 context switching).
    In fact I voted for the bug since the dawn of the ages (a.k.a. when I first spotted that bug in Adobe’s page, many years ago).
    I’ve offered to help once, I even offered some of Kopete’s webcam code (I’m the main video developer) to be included in FP, no strings attached. I took a look at Tamarin, but by the state of its page, that mentions that Tamarin will be released as part of Firefox 2 (and we currently can se Firefox 3.0.1 wandering down the internet tubes), so the project page seems frozen in time just as Prypiat (the city). There are recent commits in code, but no publicity about how it’s doing at all. But based on the aforementioned fact, if Tamarin would be the new ECMAScript solution to Firefox 2, and I’m running Firefox 3 64-bit here once in a while, may I suppose Tamarin was already ported to work fine on 64-bit systems? Heh, acording to https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/tamarin-devel/2008-May/000555.html , “Currently Tamarin Central only supports the Win64 configuration. It should pass all tests in both interp and JIT modes.”. Wow.
    Being in the last year at College demmands too much from me, so I’m even a bit distant from the KDE Project and Kopete development, as I have not much free time at all, but if I had maybe I would risk learning Amd64 Assembly to at least be able to barely browse the code. I’m not such a great programmer, I just do some low-level stuff and post random fixes for webcams’ kernel drivers from time to time. Maybe I’ll be of more use when I have a bit more time.

    Man, sorry if my words weren’t exactly candid, but after so many years of “lalalalala – I don’t hear you” from FP developers I’m pretty sure I’m not the only upset guy around.

  • http://www.jamesward.org James Ward

    I hear you. I wish that we had native 64-bit Flash Player a long time ago.

    As far as Tamarin goes… The ES4 spec is still in progress. Tamarin is an early implementation of ES4 and will probably be integrated into Firefox 4. Today Tamarin does get used in Flash Player. So when Tamarin supports 64-bit the Flash Player team can pull in those changes. I am really not a low-level enough programmer to help with Tamarin but I hope that that some open source developers out there will step up and help get 64-bit support into Tamarin.

    -James

  • http://kopete.kde.org/team.php Cláudio da Silveira Pinheiro

    Hi.

    Putting Tamarin in Firefox 4′s timeframe makes more sense. I hope it gets there in schedule and if I have time I’ll try to help, but being honest, it means Tamarin64 is waiting for us in a time at least two years from now (just in time for Duke Nukem Forever, perhaps).
    Right now the main problem is a completely different one. The point is FP 10rc1 just horribly degraded the user experience on 64-bit OSes. And this of course affects us today. If FP 10 Final is released in a similar state we and all the distros who distribude 64-bit Linux OSes will be stuck in a quagmire akin to those WWI ones, some sort of a Battle of Passchendaele with FP developers in one trench and everybody else in the opposite side.
    I’m asking you to be the sensible guy who’ll bring this issue alight, as it’s a very real concern to us 64-bit users.
    Despite so many comments equating we 64-bit users to a handful of highly vocal brats, I believe the real picture is different. We are Legion, so to say. :D And I can’t see nothing wrong about being vocal and coherent about relevant issues.
    I hope you see my point.

    Best regards.

  • http://NA axobeauvi

    I use the nspluginwrapper daily on opensuse 11;
    MozillaFirefox-3.0.1-1.1
    nspluginwrapper-0.9.91.5.99.20071225-27.1

    all and all it works very well ,but I can’t save swf since the standalone player doesn’t work right.
    can’t wait for a real 64-bit version.
    oh and beta 10 didn’t work very well ,really choppy.

  • Pingback: Making Headway on Flash Player for 64-bit Linux | James Ward - RIA Cowboy

  • Pingback: Twitter, Tweet Deck and 64 Bit Linux | Edmonds Commerce Blog



  • View James Ward's profile on LinkedIn