So many choices.
The PPAPI plugin may end up replacing www-plugins/chrome-binary-plugins[flash]. If it is compatible, you could add an appropriate blocker, and install a config snippet in /etc/chromium (see src_install in chrome-binary-plugins-53*).
http://wwwimages.adobe.com/content/dam/acom/en/legal/licenses-terms/pdf/Flash_Player_22_0.pdf 304 pages... What to do?
`pdftotext -nopgbrk -f 87 -l 95 Flash_Player_22_0.pdf` yields 415 lines for the English version.
Never mind. This is the same license as the old one. :)
USE="npapi ppapi" doesn't apply yet.
Created attachment 445198 [details] Extracted plain text of English version Do we need anything other than the English version? See attached. Alternatively, we could take the much shorter snippet from the README file, which should be equivalent to "all-rights-reserved": Legal ----- Adobe(R) Flash(R) Player. Copyright (C) 1996 - 2016 Adobe Systems Incorporated. All Rights Reserved. Adobe and Flash are either trademarks or registered trademarks in the United States and/or other countries. Disclaimer: IANAL, TINLA.
(In reply to Ulrich Müller from comment #6) > Created attachment 445198 [details] > Extracted plain text of English version > > Do we need anything other than the English version? See attached. > > Alternatively, we could take the much shorter snippet from the README file, > which should be equivalent to "all-rights-reserved": > > Legal > ----- > > Adobe(R) Flash(R) Player. Copyright (C) 1996 - 2016 Adobe Systems > Incorporated. All Rights Reserved. Adobe and Flash are either > trademarks or registered trademarks in the United States and/or > other countries. > > Disclaimer: IANAL, TINLA. The English version of the EULA didn't change. Please file a new bug report if anything is wrong with it, as it doesn't exclusively apply to this release.
(In reply to Jeroen Roovers from comment #7) > The English version of the EULA didn't change. Please file a new bug report > if anything is wrong with it, as it doesn't exclusively apply to this > release. No, nothing wrong at all. Apparently bugzie doesn't warn about new comments when submitting an attachment, otherwise I wouldn't have posted comment #6.
(In reply to Ulrich Müller from comment #8) > No, nothing wrong at all. OK > Apparently bugzie doesn't warn about new comments > when submitting an attachment, otherwise I wouldn't have posted comment #6. Weird.
