Ubuntu
unity-lens-applications package

Searching for "flash" in the "applications for download" section of the dash gives confusing results.

Bug #863745 reported by Alistair Buxton
8
This bug affects 1 person
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
Unity
Invalid
Undecided
Unassigned
unity-2d
Invalid
Undecided
Unassigned
unity-lens-applications
New
Undecided
Unassigned
unity-lens-applications (Ubuntu)
New
Undecided
Unassigned

Bug Description

To reproduce, click the "dash home", then the funny bookshelf-type icon at the bottom, and search for "flash".

Regardless of whether you are using 32 bit or 64 bit, the first two results will be the same. The first one is the appropriate package for 64 bit users to install flash, the second is the appropriate package for 32 bit users. There is no indication of which is which on this screen.

If you click the first one, software centre loads and you see a cryptic message about metapackages and amd64. For an experienced linux user this is a giveaway, but a beginner is not going to understand this. I didn't try installing this package on a 32 bit machine to see what happens, but I doubt it will be good.

If you click the second one things are worse. This just looks like a normal app. If you install this one on 32 bit it works fine. But if you install it on 64 bit, it will install OK, but firefox will not see it at all (because nspluginwrapper isn't installed along with it.)

ProblemType: Bug
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 11.10
Package: unity-place-applications (not installed)
ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 3.0.0-12.19-generic 3.0.4
Uname: Linux 3.0.0-12-generic x86_64
NonfreeKernelModules: nvidia
ApportVersion: 1.23-0ubuntu2
Architecture: amd64
Date: Sat Oct 1 01:14:09 2011
InstallationMedia: Ubuntu 11.10 "Oneiric Ocelot" - Beta amd64 (20110921.2)
ProcEnviron:
 LANGUAGE=en_GB:en
 LANG=en_GB.UTF-8
 SHELL=/bin/bash
SourcePackage: unity-lens-applications
UpgradeStatus: No upgrade log present (probably fresh install)

Revision history for this message
Alistair Buxton (a-j-buxton) wrote :
Revision history for this message
Omer Akram (om26er) wrote :

One is flash-plugin installer the other is 'adobe-flasplugin' former downloads the plugin directly from adobe without the need to enable canonica-partners repo, the latter downloads from canonical-partners repository. Overall the bug is invalid.

Changed in unity:
status: New → Invalid
Changed in unity-lens-applications:
status: New → Invalid
Changed in unity-2d:
status: New → Invalid
Changed in unity-lens-applications (Ubuntu):
status: New → Invalid
Revision history for this message
madbiologist (me-again) wrote :

@Alistair - I've just checked this on Ubuntu 11.10 beta 2 64bit. Uname is Linux 3.0.0-11-generic x86_64. I do not have the canonical-partners repository enabled (the default). When following the steps in the first sentence of this bug's original description I only see one flash icon and subtitle (Adobe Flash plugin), even if I click "See 7 more results". This most closely resembles the first icon (on the left) in your screenshot (Adobe Flash plug-in). I do not see the second icon (on the right) in your screenshot (Adobe Flash Plugin 10).

@ Omer - What causes the canonical-partners repository to become enabled? Does the user have to set it manually in Software Sources? Or can installing certain packages from the Software Centre enable it? When it is enabled, can we expose any additional information to the user to assist them to differentiate the two Flash packages and guide them as to which one to install? I presume installing both simultaneously will not be good.

Revision history for this message
Alistair Buxton (a-j-buxton) wrote :

I do not have the partner repo enabled.

This bug is not invalid since only one of the icons will result in a flash plugin installation that actually works on x86_64.

Revision history for this message
Alistair Buxton (a-j-buxton) wrote :

It turns out that I have the partner repo both enabled and disabled at the same time; that is, software centre has screwed up my sources.list. This has been reported as #871592.

It would have been better to say that *I* did not enable the partner repo. I have reproduced this bug in a virtual machine on both 64 bit and 32 bit; in both cases I performed a fresh install only for the purposes of checking this. And in both cases I was presented with the two icons. Both times I used beta 2 install medium.

Revision history for this message
Alistair Buxton (a-j-buxton) wrote :

I just tested this using amd64 daily image.

During install:

Selected "erase oneiric and reinstall."

Neither "download updates" nor "install extra software" was selected.

After install:

Partner repo is not enabled. Searching for "flash" in the lens shows two items as described in the initial report.

Revision history for this message
Alistair Buxton (a-j-buxton) wrote :

After selecting "Adobe Flash plugin 10" the software centre first asks to enable the partner repo. Then it shows this bizarre error screen.

@Omer: What it is actually showing is "flashplugin-installer" and "adobe-flashplugin:i386" - even on AMD64. As shown by the screenshot.

After installing, I have adobe-flash-properties-gtk:i386 and adobe-flashplugin:i386, and flash does not work in the browser.

Changed in unity-lens-applications (Ubuntu):
status: Invalid → New
Changed in unity-lens-applications:
status: Invalid → New
Revision history for this message
madbiologist (me-again) wrote :

Alistair - we definitely don't want the behaviour your experiencing. In that regard I disagree with Omer. Hopefully your latest information will persuade him to change his mind.

_However_, I cannot reproduce this bug - see the first paragraph in comment #3. Any ideas why? Let me know if you want me to provide more info.

Revision history for this message
Alistair Buxton (a-j-buxton) wrote :

I'm not sure why you can't reproduce this. Are you perhaps on a strange architecture, like ARM?

It isn't necessary to have the partner repo enabled - installing the adobe-flashplugin package enables it.

When I search for "flash" I get 24 more results, not 7.

Revision history for this message
madbiologist (me-again) wrote :

x86_64 here, same as you.

To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  
Everyone can see this information.
Subscribing...

Other bug subscribers

Remote bug watches

Bug watches keep track of this bug in other bug trackers.