Mint 13 64-bit, using Chrome. Why's Flash not auto-updated?

[pepperminty]

Hello,

Running Mate 13 MATE 64 bits. Using Chrome deb (from Google.com/chrome). When I visit a page with Flash, I get a bar on the top that says:
"Adobe Flash Player was blocked because it is out date."

When I click "Update plugin...", I'm taken to http://get.adobe.com/flashplayer/?no_redirect

The page says:

If you are using the Google Chrome browser, Adobe® Flash® Player is built-in but has been disabled. To enable Flash Player, follow the steps in this TechNote (http://www.adobe.com/go/flashplayerchrome)

To learn more about the enhanced support for Flash Player in Chrome, including information for developers, see this TechNote .


If you are using the open source Chromium browser, please download and install the Flash Player plug-in below.

To learn more about Flash Player and Chromium, see this TechNote (http://www.adobe.com/go/flashplayerchromium).

So I click on http://www.adobe.com/go/flashplayerchrome, which redirects to http://helpx.adobe.com/flash-player/kb/ ... hrome.html. This page says

The Google Chrome browser (32-bit) includes Adobe Flash Player built-in. Accordingly, Chrome users do not need to download Flash Player separately.

How do I install the latest version of Flash Player in Google Chrome?

Chrome users don't have to download new versions of Flash Player. Chrome automatically updates when new versions of Flash Player are available, to protect users with the latest security updates. Select About Google Chrome under the Tools menu to verify that your Chrome browser is up-to-date. (The wrench icon near the Chrome address bar indicates the Tools menu.) It can take some time before updates roll out to all Chrome users.

Advanced users and developers can also install specific plug-in versions of Flash Player. They can also install preview or release versions of Flash Player or run developer debugger versions of Flash Player.

So what should a newbie like me do?

[Condorman]

I had this issue too. I just popped into Synaptic and installed the more recent Flash plug in that's available there. This removes the mint-meta-codecs package, but will cause no harm to your system. This solved it for me.

[dominiktesla]

Download the most recent version of flash for Linux. Extract the folder and cd into the folder it was downloaded into. Copy the "libflashplayer.so" into /opt/mint-flashplugin-11 to replace the file that is currently there.

Code: Select all

$ sudo cp libflashplayer.so /opt/mint-flashplugin-11

Then copy the opt folder.

Code: Select all

$ sudo cp -r usr/* /usr

That should install flash correctly.

[bigj231]

The 64-bit version of chrome doesn't come with google's version of flash, so you have to manually install the beta from Adobe's website. If you aren't opposed to installing a plugin in firefox and having it install flash, Flash-aid (https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefo ... flash-aid/) is the way to go. It just automates the entire install process, and has the option to remove the previous versions of flash as well.

I personally use flash-aid since it is a bit easier.

-BigJ

[pepperminty]

The subject I gave for this post is "Why isn't Flash automatically included into Mint's 64-bit Chrome?" Please note I didn't ask why Flash isn't automatically included into 64-bit Chrome. I'm asking about Mint's Chrome.

The "with-codec" version of Mint is supposed to make Mint ready for use -- no need to download files to be able to listen to MP3 audio or watch DVD files. So why doesn't the Mint devs also have it so that when we install 64-bit Chrome into our 64-bit Mint, we won't need to:
--use flash-aid in Firefox (bigj231's way) or
--download flash and extract libflashplayer.so ( dominiktesla and Adobe's way) or
--Install most recent Flash plugin in Synaptic (Condorman's way)?

If I were developing a Mint that was ready to use "out of the box", I would somehow get Flash to just work after the Mint user installs 64-bit Chrome.

[esteban1uy]

I'm a little bit confused. You said:

The subject I gave for this post is "Why isn't Flash automatically included into Mint's 64-bit Chrome?" Please note I didn't ask why Flash isn't automatically included into 64-bit Chrome. I'm asking about Mint's Chrome.

But in your first post you've also said:

Running Mate 13 MATE 64 bits. Using Chrome deb (from Google.com/chrome)...

That's not "out-of-the-box" Mint's Chrome!
Even there's not an "out-of-the-box" Mint's Chrome, but a CHROMIUM browser.

If I were developing a Mint that was ready to use "out of the box", I would somehow get Flash to just work after the Mint user installs 64-bit Chrome.

You can't blame Mint devs for something Google Chrome devs didn't correctly implement.
It would be better to report this problem to the Google Chrome support: https://support.google.com/chrome/bin/a ... swer=95315

[Condorman]

In my defence, the last question you asked was -

So what should a newbie like me do?

- and that's the one I answered. I'm new to Linux Mint myself, and this was what I did.

[bimsebasse]

What esteban said - you can't demand your OS supports every browser perfectly out of the box, and chromium (chrome minus the dodgy) does work perfectly on my Mint 13 64bit install. There really isn't any reason to use Chrome instead of Chromium in Linux anymore.

[cra1g321]

There really isn't any reason to use Chrome instead of Chromium in Linux anymore.

I would disagree, Chromium is currently in the Linux Mint repos at version 18.0.1025.151 while the latest version of Google Chrome is at 19.0.1084.52, of course you could probably install a chromium ppa but you hopefully get what I mean.

Also for poeple who are using Google Chrome and keep getting that annoying outdated plugin message,
here is a fix - http://forums.linuxmint.com/viewtopic.p ... 72#p587472

[bimsebasse]

Code: Select all

...18.0.1025.151 while the latest version of Google Chrome is at 19.0.1084.52

1. how does that effect browsing? (the widespread obsession with newest possible browser version is odd)
2. you can add a chromium nightly ppa currently at 20.0.1132.11

[esteban1uy]

What is paradoxical is that the same plugin that is reported by Google Chrome as outdated, in Firefox 12.0 appears as a up to date:


I find Firefox, at least in regard to safety, a lot more reliable than Google Chrome, so I believe it. That problem between Chrome and Flash looks like something more related to the quarrels between Google and Adobe than a real security problem.

By the way, being Chrome (and I mean Google Chrome, not Chromium) a product of Google, isn't it under the same suspicions about user tracking and privacy issues that affects all the Google products?: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/ ... rtner.html

[appalbarry]

THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! dominiktesla For finally offering a SIMPLE FAST fix to this stupid problem.
http://forums.linuxmint.com/viewtopic.p ... 64#p586979
I have spent way, way too much time and effort trying to ferret out exactly what in the hell I had to do to make Flash just work since the upgrade to Mint 13 (Cinnamon).

Really, there's no way this should happen. Chrome is what 90% of (non-Firefox) people would install - Chromium is significantly less likely to show up. And Flash, love it or hate it, is still a core technology for the web.

If there's one thing that drives me crazy with software it's when something works in Version 1, then suddenly is broken in Version 2.

[dominiktesla]

Glad I could help!

[Lyn862]

Thank you dominiktesla! This is my first day with my first Linux install. You just don't get any newer than that. Thank you for making my internet work.

[aes2011]

... the quarrels between Google and Adobe than a real security problem.

Any links for that?

By the way, being Chrome (and I mean Google Chrome, not Chromium) a product of Google, isn't it under the same suspicions about user tracking and privacy issues that affects all the Google products?: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/ ... rtner.html

Yes, Apple and Microsoft would love for all of us to stop using Google. I've been using Google for years and nothing untoward has happened. It might happen tomorrow but it hasn't happened as yet!

[esteban1uy]

... the quarrels between Google and Adobe than a real security problem.

Any links for that?

Oh, that's historical! Google Chrome and Adobe devs always quarrel, like lovers do: http://www.electronista.com/articles/11 ... derstated/

By the way, being Chrome (and I mean Google Chrome, not Chromium) a product of Google, isn't it under the same suspicions about user tracking and privacy issues that affects all the Google products?: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/ ... rtner.html

Yes, Apple and Microsoft would love for all of us to stop using Google. I've been using Google for years and nothing untoward has happened. It might happen tomorrow but it hasn't happened as yet!

Then good for you. I don't use Google Chrome. If I'm forced to choose between Google Chrome and Chromium, I would always prefer Chromium (like many users: http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2012/02/chro ... u-use-poll) because it's completely Open Source and allows customizations by distribution devs (that's another way to support your preferred distro). But my heart goes out to Mint's Firefox, because using it means you're supporting (materially also) Mint's development, and both Firefox and Iceweasel (Debian rebranding) are fully Open Source.

[MrD]

To anyone reading this thread, there is an easier way to sort Flash in Chromium that should affect Chrome too.

Open Firefox (default installed with LM)
Go Tools/Addons
Search on "Flash Aid" and install it, then click the restart button
When restarted, you'll see the Flash Aid button, select advanced install, choose Adobe Flash Beta option, click "script" and then "execute" and get it installed.
After closing your browsers, you may or may not need to restart your computer.

[alex2035]

this fixed Chromium Flash for me, thank you.