On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 10:17 AM, nodata <lsof@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 17/11/10 08:57, Hans de Goede wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> For those who do not know it yet, recent Fedora glibc updates include >> an optimized memcpy (which gets used on some processors) which breaks the >> 64 bit adobe flash plugin. >> >> The problem has been analyzed and is known, as well as a fix for it, see: >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=638477 >> >> The problem still exists however. The glibc developers say that this is >> not a glibc bug, but a flash plugin bug. And technically they are 100% >> correct, and the adobe flash plugin is a buggy .... (no surprise there). >> To be specific the flash plugin is doing overlapping memcpy-s which is >> clearly not how memcpy is supposed to be used. But the way the flash >> plugin does overlapping memcpy's happens to work fine as long as one as >> the c library does the memcpy-s in forward direction. And the new memcpy >> implementation does the memcpy in backward direction. >> >> The glibc developers being technically 100% correct is not helping our >> end users in this case though. So we (The Fedora project) need to come up >> with a solution to help our end users, many of whom want to use the adobe >> flash plugin. >> >> This solution could be reverting the problem causing glibc change, or >> maybe changing it to do forward memcpy's while still using the new SSE >> instructions, or something more specific to the flash plugin, as long >> as it will automatically fix things with a yum upgrade without requiring >> any further user intervention. >> >> I would also like to point out that if this were to happen in Ubuntu >> which we sometimes look at jealously for getting more attention / users >> then us, the glibc change would likely be reverted immediately, as that >> is the right thing to do from an end user pov. >> >> I've filed a ticket for FESCo to look into this, as I believe this >> makes us look really bad, and the glibc maintainers do not seem to be >> willing to fix it without some sort of intervention: >> https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/501 >> >> Regards, >> >> Hans > > Is someone talking to Adobe about this? Yes, see https://bugs.adobe.com/jira/browse/FP-5739 -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
