[Bug 727018] New: make sure nspluginwrapper does not handle libflashplayer.so
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=727018 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=727018#c0 Summary: make sure nspluginwrapper does not handle libflashplayer.so Classification: openSUSE Product: openSUSE 12.1 Version: RC 1 Platform: All OS/Version: Other Status: NEW Severity: Major Priority: P5 - None Component: Other AssignedTo: bnc-team-screening@forge.provo.novell.com ReportedBy: wolfgang@rosenauer.org QAContact: qa@suse.de Found By: --- Blocker: --- User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:7.0.1) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/7.0.1 Since Flash is now available for x86-64 nspluginwrapper must not wrap libflashplayer.so anymore. nspluginwrapper still has Supplements flash-player which should be removed but still if it gets installed it wraps Flash (and all other plugins). Given that Firefox use a separate process for plugins (plugin-container) meanwhile there is no need to have yet another layer inbetween. So I would propose two options: - drop nspluginwrapper entirely - make sure nspluginwrapper only wraps plugins if architecture is really different between npviewer and plugin Reproducible: Always -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=727018 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=727018#c1 Andreas Jaeger <aj@suse.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |coolo@suse.com, | |wstephenson@suse.com AssignedTo|bnc-team-screening@forge.pr |sbrabec@suse.com |ovo.novell.com | --- Comment #1 from Andreas Jaeger <aj@suse.com> 2011-10-28 08:42:00 UTC --- Regarding dropping: Is anybody else besides flash-player on Firefox using nspluginwrapper? Especially konqueror or opera? Or other plugins? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=727018 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=727018#c2 --- Comment #2 from Wolfgang Rosenauer <wolfgang@rosenauer.org> 2011-10-28 08:58:05 UTC --- I had a short look into nspluginwrapper as the parameter -n looks promising. Unfortunately I cannot recognize any difference if I specify -n or not. (In reply to comment #1)
Regarding dropping:
Is anybody else besides flash-player on Firefox using nspluginwrapper? Especially konqueror or opera? Or other plugins?
If nspluginwrapper is installed basically every plugin is wrapped (AFAICS). So every browser is using the wrapper for every installed plugin which is why I wrote we should only wrap if architecture is different. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=727018 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=727018#c3 --- Comment #3 from Wolfgang Rosenauer <wolfgang@rosenauer.org> 2011-10-28 21:55:47 UTC --- Hmm, I forgot the probably easiest solution: - do not ship the .i586 package of nspluginwrapper I guess that would automatically make sure that only i386 plugins are wrapped on x86-64 machines and would solve the issue for 32bit installations. At least Firefox and Chromium use process separation already themselves for plugins so I'm not aware of any advantage to have nspluginwrapper on a 32bit installation. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=727018 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=727018#c4 Stanislav Brabec <sbrabec@suse.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Priority|P5 - None |P3 - Medium Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #4 from Stanislav Brabec <sbrabec@suse.com> 2011-10-31 14:51:10 CET --- Advantage of nspluginwrapper in 32-bit installation: Crash of plugins does not cause browser crash of browsers that call plugins in-process. Is it still valid for Firefox? On 64-bit systems nsplugiwrapper is still required for nppdf (Acrobat Reader plugin). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=727018 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=727018#c5 --- Comment #5 from Stanislav Brabec <sbrabec@suse.com> 2011-10-31 15:00:39 CET --- Removal of -n (wrapping native plugins) should be done by removing of scriptlets part: %ifarch %ix86 %{_bindir}/%{name} -a -i -n 2>&1 | grep -v "wrong ELF class" >&2 || : %else and using variant without -n for all platforms. Could anybody with i586 installation check what exactly does nspluginwrapper -a -i (Check date stamps of files in /usr/lib/browser-plugins will show, whether it not updates native wrappers or whether it deletes.) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=727018 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=727018#c6 --- Comment #6 from Wolfgang Rosenauer <wolfgang@rosenauer.org> 2011-10-31 15:41:44 UTC --- (In reply to comment #4)
Advantage of nspluginwrapper in 32-bit installation: Crash of plugins does not cause browser crash of browsers that call plugins in-process. Is it still valid for Firefox?
Current Firefox nowadays wraps (almost) all plugins through plugin-container. So this usecase is gone.
On 64-bit systems nsplugiwrapper is still required for nppdf (Acrobat Reader plugin).
And other external available plugins. (In reply to comment #5)
Removal of -n (wrapping native plugins) should be done by removing of scriptlets part:
%ifarch %ix86 %{_bindir}/%{name} -a -i -n 2>&1 | grep -v "wrong ELF class" >&2 || : %else
and using variant without -n for all platforms.
Could anybody with i586 installation check what exactly does nspluginwrapper -a -i (Check date stamps of files in /usr/lib/browser-plugins will show, whether it not updates native wrappers or whether it deletes.)
I've tried with and without -n and couldn't find any difference. Either I did something wrong or it does not work as documented. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=727018 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=727018#c7 Stanislav Brabec <sbrabec@suse.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |NEEDINFO InfoProvider| |wolfgang@rosenauer.org --- Comment #7 from Stanislav Brabec <sbrabec@suse.com> 2011-10-31 17:06:07 CET --- So for example nspluginwrapper -a -i updates time stamp of /usr/lib/browser-plugins/npwrapper.libflashplayer.so every time it is called? If you try to delete it manually, is it created again? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=727018 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=727018#c8 Wolfgang Rosenauer <wolfgang@rosenauer.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEEDINFO |ASSIGNED InfoProvider|wolfgang@rosenauer.org | --- Comment #8 from Wolfgang Rosenauer <wolfgang@rosenauer.org> 2011-10-31 16:13:19 UTC --- I've removed all npwrapper* files from /usr/lib/browser-plugins and ran nspluginwrapper -a -i and repeated it with nspluginwrapper -a -i -n and in both cases all plugins were wrapped. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=727018 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=727018#c9 Stanislav Brabec <sbrabec@suse.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |RESOLVED CC| |dmueller@suse.com Resolution| |FIXED --- Comment #9 from Stanislav Brabec <sbrabec@suse.com> 2011-10-31 17:34:07 CET --- Well, i586 build of nspluginwrapper probably interprets -n incorrectly. But according to the comment 6, it makes no sense to build it there. I believe that your and my fixes should result in a correct behavior: - Do not wrap native plugins, it makes no sense any more (bnc#727018#c6). - do not build nspluginwrapper for i386 (bnc#727018) - do not supplement flash-player anymore as it is available for i386 and x86-64 now Created request id 89822. Maybe the next Online Update of firefox can add Obsoletes: nspluginwrapper on %ix86. If flash-player will be online updated to the x86_64 version, nspluginwrapper should be updated as well. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=727018 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=727018#c10 --- Comment #10 from Bernhard Wiedemann <bwiedemann@suse.com> 2011-10-31 18:00:07 CET --- This is an autogenerated message for OBS integration: This bug (727018) was mentioned in https://build.opensuse.org/request/show/89822 Factory / nspluginwrapper -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=727018 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=727018#c11 --- Comment #11 from Wolfgang Rosenauer <wolfgang@rosenauer.org> 2011-11-07 12:19:15 UTC --- Just added this to Firefox 8 for upcoming updates: %if %suse_version > 1140 %ifarch %ix86 Obsoletes: nspluginwrapper %endif %endif That doesn't create funny install/remove cycles, does it? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=727018 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=727018#c12 --- Comment #12 from Stephan Kulow <coolo@suse.com> 2011-11-07 14:16:16 CET --- please do not obsolete packages we still have - they will become uninstallable -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
participants (1)
-
bugzilla_noreply＠novell.com