Jump to content


 


Register a free account to unlock additional features at BleepingComputer.com
Welcome to BleepingComputer, a free community where people like yourself come together to discuss and learn how to use their computers. Using the site is easy and fun. As a guest, you can browse and view the various discussions in the forums, but can not create a new topic or reply to an existing one unless you are logged in. Other benefits of registering an account are subscribing to topics and forums, creating a blog, and having no ads shown anywhere on the site.


Click here to Register a free account now! or read our Welcome Guide to learn how to use this site.

Photo

Shockwave Flash has crashed warning, Google Chrome


  • Please log in to reply
17 replies to this topic

#1 pcpunk

pcpunk

  • Members
  • 5,597 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Local time:03:31 AM

Posted 03 November 2014 - 03:26 PM

I looked this up and went through the fixes at howtogeek.com but I could not find the issue.  I was trying to view this websites videos:  http://comediansincarsgettingcoffee.com/seth-meyers-really

Any help would be great, you can view my setup below.  I might have to go to the dreaded firefox and try it out.

 

I definitely don't have two Adobe Flashes installed that I can see after clicking on the + in the upper right hand corner.

 

Perhaps this is a Linux issue, please take a look at this:  http://get.adobe.com/flashplayer/?no_redirect

 

I have Adobe Flash Player Version: 15.0.0.189, perhaps this is not supported anymore but is updating because of google chrome.  I almost posted this in the Linux section but here I am hoping for the best lol.


Edited by pcpunk, 03 November 2014 - 03:38 PM.

sBCcBvM.png

Created by Mike_Walsh

 

KDE, Ruler of all Distro's

eps2.4_m4ster-s1ave.aes_pcpunk_leavemehere

 


BC AdBot (Login to Remove)

 


#2 pcpunk

pcpunk
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 5,597 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Local time:03:31 AM

Posted 03 November 2014 - 03:51 PM

Thought I would add some more info.  Also, my Google Chrome is up to date, Version 38.0.2125.111:

Adobe Flash Player Version: 15.0.0.189
Shockwave Flash 15.0 r0
Name: Shockwave Flash
Description: Shockwave Flash 15.0 r0
Version: 15.0.0.189
Location: /opt/google/chrome/PepperFlash/libpepflashplayer.so
Type: PPAPI (out-of-process)

MIME types: MIME type Description File extensions application/x-shockwave-flash Shockwave Flash .swf application/futuresplash FutureSplash Player .spl

 

This post was interesting:  http://forums.linuxmint.com/viewtopic.php?p=883068#p883068


Edited by pcpunk, 03 November 2014 - 03:55 PM.

sBCcBvM.png

Created by Mike_Walsh

 

KDE, Ruler of all Distro's

eps2.4_m4ster-s1ave.aes_pcpunk_leavemehere

 


#3 cat1092

cat1092

    Bleeping Cat


  • BC Advisor
  • 6,998 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Carolina, USA
  • Local time:03:31 AM

Posted 05 November 2014 - 02:05 AM

Why not just uninstall Google Chrome & install a fresh copy, by download, you know where to get it by now, if not, here it is. 

 

https://www.google.com/chrome/browser/?platform=linux

 

That should repair your issues. 

 

Hope this is of help.  :)

 

Cat


Performing full disc images weekly and keeping important data off of the 'C' drive as generated can be the best defence against Malware/Ransomware attacks, as well as a wide range of other issues. 


#4 Virusdan

Virusdan

  • Members
  • 2 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:08:31 AM

Posted 05 November 2014 - 08:10 AM

I don't like using google chrome anymore, too buggy.



#5 pcpunk

pcpunk
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 5,597 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Local time:03:31 AM

Posted 05 November 2014 - 02:44 PM

Why not just uninstall Google Chrome & install a fresh copy, by download, you know where to get it by now, if not, here it is. 

 

https://www.google.com/chrome/browser/?platform=linux

 

That should repair your issues. 

 

Hope this is of help.  :)

 

Cat

Really, ok.  I did some reading and it did not seem as this would be the issue.  I will give it a try if it will help and not cause me a bunch of setup issues.  I don't get why this would help and I think I remember someone saying they tried this to no avail.  I thought it was something about the newer version of flash not being supported by Google Chrome in Linux, no?  


Edited by pcpunk, 05 November 2014 - 02:58 PM.

sBCcBvM.png

Created by Mike_Walsh

 

KDE, Ruler of all Distro's

eps2.4_m4ster-s1ave.aes_pcpunk_leavemehere

 


#6 cat1092

cat1092

    Bleeping Cat


  • BC Advisor
  • 6,998 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Carolina, USA
  • Local time:03:31 AM

Posted 06 November 2014 - 12:20 AM

I'm not a software engineer, so don't know about all of the components of the browsers, but I do know that Google Chrome 64 bit for Linux works fine on both Linux Mint 17 installs that I have. And to my knowledge, unless someone shows differently, Google Chrome ships with the latest version of Flash & whatever other components needed for a quality Web browsing experience. It's the reason I choose it over Firefox on Linux for most things. 

 

And in the article that you posted, it was recommended to do the same, a clean install of Google Chrome. 

 

http://forums.linuxmint.com/viewtopic.php?p=883068#p883068

 

Add-ons to the browser could be an issue, and that's where one can temporarily disable these & if all is fine, add each one by one & do what ever is causing the issue each time, to narrow down the offending one. Do not blindly trust all extensions, and do not run system cleaners (ie, BleachBit & Computer Janitor). These can cause a lot more harm than what good it does & can damage system files. It's not recommended to remove all temp (or leftover) files on Linux systems to save 300-400MiB in space. 

 

Secondly, every computer is different. Installs gets corrupt. Those who uses the same profile across both Linux & Windows installs could cause issues. It's important to apply all updates, as Google Chrome updates on average of 2-3 times per month (so does Firefox). Some users has both Google Chrome & Chromium installed, and the components of one can cause issues with the other. Both on the same OS are not needed, go with one or the other, the one that meets the user's needs the best. For me, that's been Google Chrome. 

 

As to two Flashes installed, the one of Google Chrome may not show as a system service, because the one included with Chrome isn't one, it's one of the browser. 

 

It's important also when diagnosing Google Chrome issues, if uninstall & reinstall is the choice, not just to uninstall the browser, but to also purge the system of all files associated with it (as with any other offending component). This option can be found in the Package Manager, after entering Google Chrome in the search box, and it's found, be sure to right click & choose "Mark for Complete Uninstallation" & Apply. This is one of three options in this list. 

 

http://helpsite.org/how-to-uninstall-programs/

 

Either the second or third option, after making sure that bookmarks are backed up, or better, being signed into Google Chrome at all times, which keeps everything in sync. 

 

That's the first suggested step, is ensuring that a total & complete install is performed. The uninstall option from the Start Menu option by right click, only removes the browser. Not all remnants of it. 

 

Please keep us informed of progress, and if this doesn't help, we'll have to see what else can be done. 

 

Hope this is of assistance.  :thumbup2:

 

Cat


Performing full disc images weekly and keeping important data off of the 'C' drive as generated can be the best defence against Malware/Ransomware attacks, as well as a wide range of other issues. 


#7 pcpunk

pcpunk
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 5,597 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Local time:03:31 AM

Posted 08 November 2014 - 12:53 PM

I did disable extensions.  

 

Also this is only an issue on this site and not others like youtube.

 

I do not have Chromium.

 

I will test some of this out asap.


sBCcBvM.png

Created by Mike_Walsh

 

KDE, Ruler of all Distro's

eps2.4_m4ster-s1ave.aes_pcpunk_leavemehere

 


#8 pcpunk

pcpunk
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 5,597 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Local time:03:31 AM

Posted 08 November 2014 - 05:57 PM

cat1092, did you try to play video on that site as we are using similar setup.

 

Uninstall did not help.


Edited by pcpunk, 08 November 2014 - 07:05 PM.

sBCcBvM.png

Created by Mike_Walsh

 

KDE, Ruler of all Distro's

eps2.4_m4ster-s1ave.aes_pcpunk_leavemehere

 


#9 pcpunk

pcpunk
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 5,597 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Local time:03:31 AM

Posted 08 November 2014 - 07:13 PM

Unsure why I have this version in google chrome (Version: 15.0.0.189) and the (11.2.202.411) version in the Package manager.  And why Firefox has the 11.2.202.411 verson?  I think the  (Version: 15.0.0.189) is messing something up and maybe is not meant for Linux? just a wild guess.

 

I can play the website video in firefox.  At the Adobe site the newer version is (11.2.202.411)  http://get.adobe.com/flashplayer/?no_redirect  Why would it not be the newer version?

 

It seems that if I could install or replace the new plugin with the old plugin  (11.2.202.411) then it would work, but again this is just a wild guess and I can't figure out how to do this.  Because Firefox uses the old plugin and it works.


Edited by pcpunk, 08 November 2014 - 07:45 PM.

sBCcBvM.png

Created by Mike_Walsh

 

KDE, Ruler of all Distro's

eps2.4_m4ster-s1ave.aes_pcpunk_leavemehere

 


#10 cat1092

cat1092

    Bleeping Cat


  • BC Advisor
  • 6,998 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Carolina, USA
  • Local time:03:31 AM

Posted 09 November 2014 - 02:23 AM

 

 

Unsure why I have this version in google chrome (Version: 15.0.0.189) and the (11.2.202.411) version in the Package manager.  And why Firefox has the 11.2.202.411 verson? 

 

pcpunk, I tried to explain this earlier, but since you didn't understand, I'll go about it differently, maybe this will help you to know. 

 

What you see in the Package Manager has nothing to do with the inner components of Google Chrome, as it doesn't require Flash to be installed separate. 

 

On the other hand, Firefox does, and that's why you see 11.2, 202.411 in there for it. Because natively, there is no way to get the latest Flash on any LInux install. The only way to have the latest Flash (and only on that browser), is if it's built into the browser, like it is with Google Chrome. Or any other browser that may include the latest. Firefox depends on the Flash installed on the OS, Google Chrome doesn't. 

 

A few LInux distros has Google Chrome by default, for this reason. To give it's users the latest possible Flash content. 

 

 

 

I can play the website video in firefox.  At the Adobe site the newer version is (11.2.202.411)  http://get.adobe.com/flashplayer/?no_redirect  Why would it not be the newer version?

As covered above, and as explained before, this is because you were checking on a Linux OS. Had you booted into your other OS & checked, you'd see a different result, that is, if Flash (or Adobe) are still supporting XP, not to worry, they won't be for much longer. Java announced their non-support status almost as soon as MS officially dropped support. Flash will be next on the hit list, and if Chrome decides to drop support for XP, game is over for those using that OS for any Internet content. It'll be the wide open gate for the least secure OS on the planet, AV installed or not, that the criminals are looking for to expose, as on Windows, Flash has to be kept updated, for security purposes. It's not the same with Linux. 

 

However in either case, as long as Google Chrome will install, it won't matter if the OS supports it or not, it's there. The user cannot control this from the Package Manager, unless that person wants to uninstall Chrome, and why would they? Linux users are 4 major Flash releases behind, and numerous minor ones. For example, version 11 had ten or more minor "bug fix" releases (11.3, 11.4, 11.5, on through 11.9, you've missed out on these with Firefox), so did 12, 13, 14 & the latest version 15. If a Linux user didn't have Google Chrome, then versions 12 through 15 would have been entirely missed. 

 

It's probably a minor issue that will be addressed in the next release, as a new one comes out like every couple of months. I haven't had this issue on either of my Linux Mint 17 with Google Chrome browsers. Maybe others has had this along with you, but I just booted and checked my other two computers, Flash content is working fine with Google Chrome on Mint 64 bit. If YouTube uses Flash, it's working on my end. Website videos may vary on any browser, I've had some to work, others not to. I don't know the differences, therefore nothing for me to explain, other than that I will disable add-ons (or extensions) to see if this helps. It's best to disable all when attempting this. 

 

 

 

It seems that if I could install or replace the new plugin with the old plugin  (11.2.202.411) then it would work, but again this is just a wild guess and I can't figure out how to do this.  Because Firefox uses the old plugin and it works.

 

In the meantime, why not just watch videos on Firefox & view the rest on Google Chrome? Unlike many other components of the OS which are open source, if those of Chrome are tinkered with in the about.config tab, you'll end up with a broken browser & need to reinstall again. You cannot install a 2+ year old version of Flash in a browser that upgrades almost monthly, just as Firefox does (unlike the default or shipped browser of the "other OS", that may get a new version once every 2 years, on supported OS's). If you've used Chrome for long (18 months or so), you'll have noticed by now that there's probably been more new versions of that browser (as well as Firefox) shipped, than in the almost last 20 years of IE, which was stuck at version 6 (IE6) for over five (5+) years. And how many releases of both Google Chrome & Firefox will come & go, becoming obsolete before IE12 is released? 

 

That's what I do, is switch between browsers, using the one that meets the need. For example with me, it's downloading. The available add-on Down Them All not only downloads files faster than Google Chrome, but also has hash checking capabilities, provided one copies & pastes the correct value, and then select the type (MD5, SHA-1, etc.). Firefox delivers like no other browser with their native download add-on. 

 

This won't be an issue for long anyway, as the bugs in HTML5 are being ironed out, and by 2016/17, Flash should be where it needs to be, in the history books (or Wikipedia), a relic of the "old" days of computing. If nothing else does in all of the older OS's, this will, as there has to be a content plugin for viewing. Surely Adobe will setup any computers that's connected to the Internet to auto uninstall what will be by then, an unlicensed to use app. Their EULA likely has the needed information. 

 

As to why LInux users don't have the latest version of Flash all along, this is a huge question. Because it was Linux users & us only, that had 64 bit Flash two years before it was offered to Windows users. We used it, and one day with no warning (close or right before the version 11 releases), we no longer had the latest Flash content anymore. Adobe used Linux users as guinea pigs, then tossed us to the trash, once they had a usable Windows version. The exces there could have acted more with class over this matter, there was no thank you, [fill in the blank] you, no apology, nothing. 

 

Adobe shafted the Linux community in a deep way & it'll never be forgotten by long-term users. It'll do little, if any, good for them to offer a "new, dynamic offering" to compete with the final version of HTML5 to us. As all of us long term Linux users remembers this, and it will never go away. Had Adobe acted with class, their actions may have been understood, like the folks who runs the Ubuntu family of distros did with Ubuntu One & other offerings, there was at least a 60 day notice in the matter. That wasn't a popular decision, but at least Canonical gave us notice. 

 

Finally, that's why many of us has more than one browser installed, so that if one can't do the task, there's another that can. Simple as that. 

 

The sooner Flash is gone, the better it'll be for all, one reason being security, the other being, it's a product that's behind the times. Mozilla, Opera & probably even Google all are working hard to deliver as much HTML5 content as possible to users & has been for some time. And like the way that Google Chrome is delivering Flash, HTML5 will be in the supported versions of browsers for all on supported OS's, not a backroom business deal cut with Microsoft to shaft those who doesn't run their OS (those who are running unsupported OS's are likely out of luck). Adobe will pay a hefty price for this mentality line over the course of years. 

 

Even the late Steve Jobs was known for his strong distaste of Flash long back, and didn't ship it on Apple computers in later years. The end user had to install any Adobe software, if it was wanted. 

 

Cat


Performing full disc images weekly and keeping important data off of the 'C' drive as generated can be the best defence against Malware/Ransomware attacks, as well as a wide range of other issues. 


#11 pcpunk

pcpunk
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 5,597 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Local time:03:31 AM

Posted 09 November 2014 - 05:50 PM

I don't like using google chrome anymore, too buggy.

Hmm, been quite good for my usage.  Only this issue with one video program.


sBCcBvM.png

Created by Mike_Walsh

 

KDE, Ruler of all Distro's

eps2.4_m4ster-s1ave.aes_pcpunk_leavemehere

 


#12 pcpunk

pcpunk
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 5,597 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Local time:03:31 AM

Posted 09 November 2014 - 06:12 PM

cat, I did understand some-what but that was interesting and made it more clear to me.  I was kinda thinking that chrome would use the one in the OS if needed LOL, shows what I know.  I was/am a little confused by why the newer one would not work with this particular site.  As stated, it works on ALL other sites that I have been to, this is the first time I have had an issue, good enough for me.  I think you are right that it will work at some point soon.  This is Jerry Seinfelds site as you might have seen, one would think he would have someone doing good tech. work on his project, I guess not lol.  I think it is probably a political issue, business issue ya know.  He probably is making money using this video service somehow.  I tried to see which one it is but I don't know how to do this.  Can you look at the site and see what video company it is? and if you can play it on your linux chrome?  http://comediansincarsgettingcoffee.com/

 

For now I will just use FF, but don't like it lol.  Like you said that is why it is there.  


Edited by pcpunk, 09 November 2014 - 06:18 PM.

sBCcBvM.png

Created by Mike_Walsh

 

KDE, Ruler of all Distro's

eps2.4_m4ster-s1ave.aes_pcpunk_leavemehere

 


#13 wishmakingfairy

wishmakingfairy

  • Members
  • 212 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Female
  • Local time:02:31 AM

Posted 09 November 2014 - 06:48 PM

I don't know if this will help, but you could always try updating the ubuntu-restricted extras.

 

To do so

 

1. Open a terminal

2. Type: sudo apt-get install ubuntu-restricted-extras

 

If i remember correctly, flash was discontinued awhile back for linux because the company is a bunch of jerks :P

 

I guess you could also use the janitor function in ubuntu tweak  It works on 14.04 despite it saying for 13.10 and older versions.


Edited by wishmakingfairy, 09 November 2014 - 06:53 PM.

Using ubuntu and sharing how to as well as collecting how to scripts for common programs. Feel free to ask or share ^-^


#14 pcpunk

pcpunk
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 5,597 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Local time:03:31 AM

Posted 10 November 2014 - 11:58 AM

I don't know if this will help, but you could always try updating the ubuntu-restricted extras.

 

To do so

 

1. Open a terminal

2. Type: sudo apt-get install ubuntu-restricted-extras

 

If i remember correctly, flash was discontinued awhile back for linux because the company is a bunch of jerks :P

 

I guess you could also use the janitor function in ubuntu tweak  It works on 14.04 despite it saying for 13.10 and older versions.

I will look into that but I think as cat said, it is just an issue with the new Flash, because it works in Firefox with the old Flash.  I think, if you are following this you can see that chrome has the new flash built in to the browser, Firefox has it in the OS, that is where it uses it from what I understand.

 

Please explain, before I try this, how would this help...if I already have the latest flash in chrome?  Chrome works everywhere else as far as video goes so I thinks it is an isolated issue-with a lesser used/preferred video player, and as cat1092 said it should be fixed in the next update for flash in chrome, I hopes lol.

 

Chrome is being a bit buggy as some have stated.  I am finding today and this week that some sites I go to have been a little tweaked, so much so that I cannot log into them, that is not good, what's up Google Chrome?  I used to love you but now I don't know I might have to start cheating on you lol, see ya.


sBCcBvM.png

Created by Mike_Walsh

 

KDE, Ruler of all Distro's

eps2.4_m4ster-s1ave.aes_pcpunk_leavemehere

 


#15 cat1092

cat1092

    Bleeping Cat


  • BC Advisor
  • 6,998 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Carolina, USA
  • Local time:03:31 AM

Posted 11 November 2014 - 12:20 AM

Actually Chrome is acting up on both Linux & Windows a bit, will open a page, and the content is there, but a lot is missing, like pictures. The only shown content will be words. Of course, their answer is that it's the ISP, or our modem/router configuration, or wireless card. Ha! Blaming it on the consumer, as always. 

 

This is why I also use Firefox for transactions, last time I used Chrome to, the page didn't reload correctly, though I could make it out, neither eBay's or PayPal's images showed. Fortunately, I was emailed a receipt, and all is OK. But I'll trust my business to Firefox. If Chrome continues to show it's ugly side, will dump the browser as fast as I began using it. 

 

I was a Firefox user from mid 2009 thorough mid to late 2013, was attracted to Chrome due to a couple of buggy Firefox releases, but it seems that Firefox has their act together as of late. Can just as easily switch back, and the cool thing about Mozilla, where Firefox comes from, is a not for profit corporation. While at the same time, Google has cash running out of their ears, all the more reason it's 100% unacceptable on their end to produce & release inferior products for the public to use. We should not be beta testers for the next Google Chrome release, unless we agree to it, and to my knowledge, that's a Windows only option (beta/preview testing of both Chrome & Firefox). 

 

It just seems that of late, Google has been sliding in beta releases of Chrome to all of it's users, an unacceptable act for a multi-billion dollar corporation. When a page is opened, all of the content should be displayed & properly. If it were a flaky Internet connection, then all browsers would do the same. It's only with Google Chrome that I'm having some on & off issues, and it happened today when purchasing a SATA power splitter. Fortunately, it happened at the end, and like stated, have my email receipt. 

 

Just won't use Google Chrome for future transactions, as with MS Windows. No big deal. 

 

Cat


Performing full disc images weekly and keeping important data off of the 'C' drive as generated can be the best defence against Malware/Ransomware attacks, as well as a wide range of other issues. 





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users