Fixing the glibc adobe flash incompatibility
aph at redhat.com
Thu Nov 18 15:21:53 UTC 2010
On 11/18/2010 02:16 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Andrew Haley (aph at redhat.com) said:
>>> and, most importantly, because it is NOT our job to work around bugs
>>> in proprietary software!
>> How is any of that a reason not to patch glibc?
>> Upside of patching: happy users.
>> Downside: nothing.
> Downside: cranky libc maintainers
> While possibly sometimes hard to distinguish from the default state, I'm
> guessing that the chance of getting glibc upstream to change their behavior
> for a closed-source app that broke semantics defined in K&R is nil, and they're
> going to be pretty annoyed if we slam that in on top of them.
I sympathize. This comes down to the core question that we keep
banging against: who is Fedora for, its users or it maintainers?
More information about the devel