That is not the first `memcpy()` issue that I have heard. There was the reverse `memcpy()` in glibc 2.13 that broke plenty of software using `memcpy()` in place

That is not the first `memcpy()` issue that I have heard. There was the reverse `memcpy()` in glibc 2.13 that broke plenty of software using `memcpy()` in places where `memmove()` should have been used.