559142 - [OOPP] add support for using i386 plugins from an x86_64 host

Status: RESOLVED FIXED

(Core Graveyard :: Plug-ins, defect)

Description

[Justin Dolske [:Dolske]]

OS X comes with Flash and QuickTime pre-bundled (in /Library/Internet Plugins/). However, these are both 32 bit binaries (even on 10.6), and so the new 64-bit Firefox builds don't use them. This has the potential for sucking from a UX pov, because Flash/QT stop working if a user installs a 64-bit Firefox. Clearly we'd need to address this before ever automatically updating someone to a 64-bit build, and it's a bit undesirable for new installs too (though not much worse than other platforms which don't bundle these plugins).

Not sure what the options are here...

* Work with Apple to get 64-bit versions of these plugins preinstalled?
* Roll our own system to install 64-bit Flash? [Doesn't help w/QT]
* Make the OOPP plugin-container process 32 bit?

Comment 2

[Johnny Stenback (:jst)]

Josh, I'm assuming this is a dupe, can you please mark as such if that's the case?

Comment 3

[Josh Aas]

The existing Quicktime and Flash plugins won't run out-of-process, and thus we can't do any sort of cross-architecture load. We 'll be solving this problem by getting newer versions of the plugins and adding them to PFS, which is our system for delivering uninstalled plugins to users. We may, in the Flash case, investigate running 32-bit Flash 10.1 OOP in the 64-bit browser, but that doesn't solve the problem in the summary here, which refers to OS-bundled plugins. Updating bundled plugins is Apple's issue, not ours.

We can leave this bug open if you want, but I don't think it'll track work we're planning to do.

Comment 6

[Timothy Miller]

I've run into this problem, and I'm confused by the response.  

Referring to your comment, "The existing Quicktime and Flash plugins won't run out-of-process," it appears that this is exactly what Safari does already.  If you run 64-bit Safari and view a flash video, one finds in the process table a 32-bit container for the Flash plugin.  

Considering that you made this comment 3 months ago, is it just out of date?  I'm referring to Safari 5.x.

Comment 7

[Josh Aas]

Attachment: fix v0.1

Just saving off part of the work so far. This along with the patch in bug 578868 will get the browser recognizing the proper set of plugins based on available architecture options.

Comment 8

[Antoine Turmel [:GeekShadow]]

what about Windows/Linux platforms ?

Comment 9

[Andre-John Mas]

(In reply to comment #8)
> what about Windows/Linux platforms ?

I would be inclined to provide separate tickets for each platform, and then just leave this ticket to focus on the MacOS X platform. I'll let Josh make the call here.

Comment 11

[Matěj Cepl]

This is not Mac-specific (at least Linux is affected as well).

Comment 12

[Benjamin Smedberg]

*This* bug is mac-specific.

Comment 13

[(not currently active) Ted Mielczarek]

bug 588749 (that Josh just duped), was pretty clearly about Linux. I agree that they're different sets of work, but we should keep the bugs separate if they are.

Comment 14

[Nomis101]

There is now a beta version of a 64bit Flash plugin for Mac OS X, that works nice with an 64bit FF (b6) version.
http://labs.adobe.com/downloads/flashplayer10.html

Comment 15

[Timothy Miller]

Is Firefox smart about loading 32-bit plugins into 32-bit processes and 64-bit plugins into 64-bit processes?  Or does it just assume one and fail at the other?

Comment 16

[Josh Aas]

(In reply to comment #15)
> Is Firefox smart about loading 32-bit plugins into 32-bit processes and 64-bit
> plugins into 64-bit processes?  Or does it just assume one and fail at the
> other?

It's smart (enough, I think), and the architecture of the host is preferred. Most of that logic is in the patch on bug 590057, we'll have a little more work to do in bugs like 596762.

Comment 17

[Josh Aas]

Checked in the last dependency to make this work on mozilla-central, resolving fixed. If there are issues with this feature please file separate bugs.

Comment 18

[d.a.]

I'm a little confused about this bug. If running Firefox in 64-bit should it be able to use 32-bit plugins or only 64-bit ones? Currently the only plugin listed in about:plugins is the Java plugin.

If the plan is to make i386/x86_64 builds for release the above will cause problems for those running an Intel-based Mac (except Core Duo models) as it will default to loading Firefox in 64-bit.

Comment 19

[Andre-John Mas]

If using OOP plugins, then it is to allow 64-bit Firefox to run both 32-bit and 64-bit plugins. I am not sure which beta build this functionality it meant to be available in though.

Comment 20

[(not currently active) Ted Mielczarek]

This bug only added code support for running 32-bit plugins in a 32/64 universal build. We aren't producing that kind of universal builds yet, that's bug 571367.

Comment 21

[Max]

To this user the bug is definitely *not* fixed. The answer is given in Comment 14 from Nomis101: "There is now a beta version of a 64bit Flash plugin for Mac OS X, that works nice with an 64bit FF (b6) version.
http://labs.adobe.com/downloads/flashplayer10.html"

The ongoing problem (or a different bug?) is that FF directs users to a plugin that doesn't work.

Comment 22

[Jürgen Kreileder]

Apparently you're using b6 - but the code for running 32-bit plugins with a 64-bit Firefox is only available in nightly builds so far (b7pre).