Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Hello!
New Flash Player plugin 24.0.0.194 does not run under RHEL 5
I have flash-plugin-24.0.0.194-release.i386 RPM installed on a i386 PC under RHEL5.7. While starting firefox web browser I have the following error message:
LoadPlugin: failed to initialize shared library /usr/lib/flash-plugin/libflashplayer.so [/usr/lib/flash-plugin/libflashplayer.so: undefined symbol: gdk_x11_window_get_drawable_impl]
The ldd request shows:
[sysadm@williams ~]$ ldd -r /usr/lib/flash-plugin/libflashplayer.so
linux-gate.so.1 => (0xb7715000)
libGL.so.1 => /usr/lib/libGL.so.1 (0xb6515000)
libdl.so.2 => /lib/libdl.so.2 (0xb6510000)
libpthread.so.0 => /lib/libpthread.so.0 (0xb64f6000)
librt.so.1 => /lib/librt.so.1 (0xb64ed000)
libX11.so.6 => /usr/lib/libX11.so.6 (0xb63e9000)
libXt.so.6 => /usr/lib/libXt.so.6 (0xb6391000)
libnss3.so => /usr/lib/libnss3.so (0xb6265000)
libsmime3.so => /usr/lib/libsmime3.so (0xb623d000)
libssl3.so => /usr/lib/libssl3.so (0xb61fe000)
libnspr4.so => /usr/lib/libnspr4.so (0xb61c4000)
libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0 (0xb5e2a000)
libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0 (0xb5d9d000)
libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.so.0 (0xb5d86000)
libpango-1.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libpango-1.0.so.0 (0xb5d47000)
libfontconfig.so.1 => /usr/lib/libfontconfig.so.1 (0xb5d18000)
libgobject-2.0.so.0 => /lib/libgobject-2.0.so.0 (0xb5cd8000)
libglib-2.0.so.0 => /lib/libglib-2.0.so.0 (0xb5c3a000)
libfreetype.so.6 => /usr/lib/libfreetype.so.6 (0xb5bba000)
libstdc++.so.6 => /usr/lib/libstdc++.so.6 (0xb5acf000)
libm.so.6 => /lib/libm.so.6 (0xb5aa6000)
libgcc_s.so.1 => /lib/libgcc_s.so.1 (0xb5a9a000)
libc.so.6 => /lib/libc.so.6 (0xb593c000)
libnvidia-tls.so.304.125 => /usr/lib/tls/libnvidia-tls.so.304.125 (0xb5938000)
libnvidia-glcore.so.304.125 => /usr/lib/libnvidia-glcore.so.304.125 (0xb3a01000)
libXext.so.6 => /usr/lib/libXext.so.6 (0xb39f1000)
/lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0x4c8dd000)
libXau.so.6 => /usr/lib/libXau.so.6 (0xb39ee000)
libXdmcp.so.6 => /usr/lib/libXdmcp.so.6 (0xb39e7000)
libSM.so.6 => /usr/lib/libSM.so.6 (0xb39de000)
libICE.so.6 => /usr/lib/libICE.so.6 (0xb39c4000)
libnssutil3.so => /usr/lib/libnssutil3.so (0xb39a0000)
libplc4.so => /usr/lib/libplc4.so (0xb399c000)
libplds4.so => /usr/lib/libplds4.so (0xb3997000)
libz.so.1 => /lib/libz.so.1 (0xb3984000)
libpangocairo-1.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libpangocairo-1.0.so.0 (0xb397b000)
libatk-1.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libatk-1.0.so.0 (0xb395f000)
libgmodule-2.0.so.0 => /lib/libgmodule-2.0.so.0 (0xb395c000)
libcairo.so.2 => /usr/lib/libcairo.so.2 (0xb38ed000)
libXrender.so.1 => /usr/lib/libXrender.so.1 (0xb38e4000)
libXinerama.so.1 => /usr/lib/libXinerama.so.1 (0xb38e1000)
libXi.so.6 => /usr/lib/libXi.so.6 (0xb38d9000)
libXrandr.so.2 => /usr/lib/libXrandr.so.2 (0xb38d5000)
libXcursor.so.1 => /usr/lib/libXcursor.so.1 (0xb38ca000)
libXfixes.so.3 => /usr/lib/libXfixes.so.3 (0xb38c5000)
libexpat.so.0 => /lib/libexpat.so.0 (0xb38a4000)
libpangoft2-1.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libpangoft2-1.0.so.0 (0xb3877000)
libpng12.so.0 => /usr/lib/libpng12.so.0 (0xb3850000)
undefined symbol: gdk_x11_window_get_drawable_impl (/usr/lib/flash-plugin/libflashplayer.so)
undefined symbol: gtk_widget_get_window (/usr/lib/flash-plugin/libflashplayer.so)
undefined symbol: g_main_context_push_thread_default (/usr/lib/flash-plugin/libflashplayer.so)
Old Flash plugin 11.2.202.643 at the same PC/OS works fine.
System requirements for FP24 shows that it is compatible with RedHat Eneterprise Linux 5.6 and newer. But it seems that FP 24 requires glib2 library package newer than 2.12.3 available for RHEL 5.x.
Any ideas?
To be clear, we're no longer shipping security updates for Flash Player 11.2, so you'd be leaving your machines at risk by running it.
We provide Linux as a courtesy to the community (it's a very small segment of our user-base, and we lose money by providing it) and the wide fragmentation and long-tail between Linux distributions means that we're never going to support everything out there. We focus our efforts on current versions of the most widely used distributions (our general mantra is "do
...Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Hi,
Following are the system requirements Adobe Flash Player | Tech specs
Also, since we have moved from 11 to 24 version, minimum glibc version required is 2.14.
Thanks!
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
At the tech specs page I see the line 'Linux: 32- and 64-bit: openSUSE 11.3 or later, RHEL 5.6 or later or Ubuntu 10.04 or later' and no requirements for glibc version. RHEL5 based on glibc 2.5, RHEL 6 on glibc 2.12. And FP 24 works under RHEL6!
We have a number of PCs (40+) under old RHEL5.x and I can't upgrade them to RHEL6/7 instantly. It requres lot of work and solving some incompatibilities with third party software...
Where I can download the last version of FP11 for Linux?
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Hi,
We don't recommend using FP11 over FP24. Upgrading the glibc library package or the OS would be the best option.
You can find FP11 here : Archived Adobe Flash Player versions
Thanks!
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
To be clear, we're no longer shipping security updates for Flash Player 11.2, so you'd be leaving your machines at risk by running it.
We provide Linux as a courtesy to the community (it's a very small segment of our user-base, and we lose money by providing it) and the wide fragmentation and long-tail between Linux distributions means that we're never going to support everything out there. We focus our efforts on current versions of the most widely used distributions (our general mantra is "do the most good for the most people"). While upgrading your OS is always a hassle (particularly in a development shop), our task of managing the entire distributed population of Flash Player is several orders of magnitude larger.
As a workaround until you can update your systems, if you're unable to install Flash Player from our distribution packages, you might be able to get away with using Google Chrome, which bundles Flash Player as a built-in component. I'm not sure that your config meets the minimum system requirements for Chrome, but it's worth exploring as a low-effort alternative.