On 11/17/2010 09:09 PM, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 2:28 PM, Bruno Wolff III<bruno@xxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 08:57:20 +0100, >> Hans de Goede<hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx> 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. >> I saw memcpy / memmove issues affecting squashfs-tools shortly before the >> F14 alpha. So we had some what of a heads up about the issue over three >> months ago. It is unfortunate that we didn't catch the flash issue during >> prerelease testing of F14. If this really is an important critera for >> releases, maybe we should be having QA testing that flash works. > I will be very, very, disappointed if that gets added as a criteria > for a Fedora release. It would be no different than making sure the > nvidia driver works, and we certainly shouldn't be doing that either. > > josh I can relate to that. I'm all for pure open source, but.. I really can't see why it would be a bad thing Fedora would do QA on a proprietary software that is very important for a majority of the Fedora users. If we'd have an open source flash player that almost everyone could run as a substitute, then it would be a different situation. I would say that is the case regarding Nvidia. Cheers, Magnus -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
