Chris Ilias wrote:
On 10-12-30 6:39 PM, Paul B. Gallagher wrote:
My system has Shockwave Flash 10.1 r102, which is reported as
"outdated," but the new version is 10.1.102.64, so I'm not too
terribly alarmed. At a certain level of subtlety, the site should
just say, "close enough for rock 'n' roll," don'tcha think?
The security vulnerabilities fixed in those Flash updates are huge.
That's one of the reasons why Mozilla created to plugin check page.
OK, your word "huge" was enough to alarm me, so I went to the Adobe site
and installed both plugins. When I returned to the plugincheck page, it
still didn't recognize Shockwave Flash 10.1 r102 as the current version,
but it approved Shockwave for Director 11.5.9.615.
I concluded that either there's a bug in the way plugincheck matches
version numbers reported by SeaMonkey to version numbers reported by
Adobe, or Adobe's installer is failing to update my system, or SeaMonkey
is not reporting version numbers correctly. So I went to Add/Remove
programs, located the Adobe Flash Player 10 Plugin, and clicked for
support information. Sure enough, the system reported my version as
10.1.102.64, just as it should. The third theory (bad SM version
reporting) seems to be confirmed. With version 10.1.102.64, SM is
reporting version "10.1 r102," so of course plugincheck thinks it's a
mismatch.
I would also add that I think it's inappropriate and misleading to patch
a "huge" security hole (unless that was just hyperbole on your part) and
use a version number that differs only in the fourth place. If it's that
big a deal, the version numbering should be more obviously different.
--
War doesn't determine who's right, just who's left.
--
Paul B. Gallagher
_______________________________________________
support-seamonkey mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
