Note: This bug is displayed in read-only format because the product is no longer active in Red Hat Bugzilla.

Bug 68165

Summary:	mozilla segfaults when going to Flash-enabled web page
Product:	[Retired] Red Hat Public Beta	Reporter:	Oleg Drokin <green>
Component:	gcc	Assignee:	Jakub Jelinek <jakub>
Status:	CLOSED RAWHIDE	QA Contact:	Ben Levenson <benl>
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	medium
Version:	limbo	CC:	blizzard, redhat, wtogami
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	i386
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2002-08-19 09:34:15 UTC	Type:	---
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On:
Bug Blocks:	67217

Description Oleg Drokin 2002-07-07 10:41:41 UTC

Mozilla 1.0.1 segfaults when going to flash enabled web page, instead of asking
for permission to install flash plugin like mozilla from RH 7.3 installation did.

For example this can be seen by visiting http://www.mtv.ru or
http://www.afisha.ru sites
for instant crash.

Comment 1 Christopher Blizzard 2002-07-07 17:30:10 UTC

Yay, binary incompatibility!

Comment 2 Jakub Jelinek 2002-07-07 18:20:34 UTC

Chris, and what do you expect me to do with it?
gcc 3.1 simply is not binary compatible with 2.9x for C++.

Comment 3 Nathan G. Grennan 2002-07-07 20:33:29 UTC

hehe, which is why I recompiled mozilla and galeon asap with gcc 2.96(even
discovered a but in g++296 in the process) :)

Comment 4 Christopher Blizzard 2002-07-07 22:19:50 UTC

I'm just being whiny. :)

Comment 5 Christopher Blizzard 2002-07-08 12:41:29 UTC

*** Bug 67899 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 6 Christopher Blizzard 2002-07-08 12:42:24 UTC

*** Bug 68006 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 7 Christopher Blizzard 2002-07-08 12:43:34 UTC

*** Bug 68230 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 8 Christopher Blizzard 2002-07-12 21:47:11 UTC

*** Bug 68691 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 9 Christopher Blizzard 2002-07-16 15:30:34 UTC

*** Bug 68923 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 10 Christopher Blizzard 2002-07-19 16:07:18 UTC

*** Bug 69222 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 11 Warren Togami 2002-08-19 09:34:10 UTC

Is this still a bug?

Comment 12 Christopher Blizzard 2002-08-20 03:36:17 UTC

No, this should be fixed.  I compile with gcc 2.96 now.