Bug 1082764 seems to have caused this intermittent orange. Going to disable the test for now. https://tbpl.mozilla.org/php/getParsedLog.php?id=51873825&tree=Fx-Team&full=1 https://tbpl.mozilla.org/php/getParsedLog.php?id=51890929&tree=Fx-Team&full=1 https://tbpl.mozilla.org/php/getParsedLog.php?id=51897311&tree=Fx-Team&full=1

And disabling this test made browser_bug585558.js permafail: Disabled in https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/2114ef80f6ae

/r/1837 - Bug 1094312: Properly destroy browsers when switching between remote and non-remove pages and override the default destroy method in remote-browser.xml. /r/1839 - Bug 1094312: Fix browser_bug553455.js to handle the cases where the progress notification is hidden before it has fully appeared. /r/1841 - Bug 1094312: Fix browser_bug553455.js:test_cancel_restart by pausing the download for long enough for the progress notification to show reliably. Pull down these commits: hg pull review -r b52013eacda71455eb733b68a99b70af5e634d62

Note that the patches here (in particular the last commit) depend on bug 1116629. Mconley to review the first commit and Gijs the rest.

https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/1839/#review1271 ::: browser/base/content/test/general/browser.ini (Diff revision 1) > -#skip-if = buildapp == 'mulet' || e10s # Bug 1066070 - I don't think either popup notifications nor addon install stuff works on mulet? ; for e10s, indefinite waiting halfway through the test, tracked in bug 1093586 Please make sure to update bug 1093586 appropriately. ::: browser/base/content/test/general/browser_bug553455.js (Diff revision 1) > - "Should have seen the install blocked - 2nd time"); It's kind of a shame that now the test failure messages won't be unique, and we'll have to dig through logs to figure out what's going on if it fails, but I don't see a good way to fix that.

https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/1841/#review1273 with the below addressed: ::: toolkit/mozapps/extensions/test/xpinstall/slowinstall.sjs (Diff revision 1) > +function parseQueryString(aQueryString) { Can't you use URLSearchParams instead? (not sure if it is available for sjs files...) ::: toolkit/mozapps/extensions/test/xpinstall/slowinstall.sjs (Diff revision 1) > + // nsIOutputStream so here we are. Did you file a bug? :-) This is test code so I don't care about perf so much, but it'd be nice if there were a good way to do this in prod code, too.

https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/1839/#review1277 Ship It!

Oh, with the ship it conditional on the traditional green try push. ;-)

https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/1837/#review1381 ::: toolkit/content/widgets/remote-browser.xml (Diff revision 1) > + <!-- This is necessary because the destructor doesn't always get called when > + we are removed from a tabbrowser. This will be explicitly called by tabbrowser --> Huh. That's a surprising result. Also seems to be an old one looking at browser.xml. :/

https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/1835/#review1383 Ship It!

(In reply to :Gijs Kruitbosch from comment #9) > https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/1841/#review1273 > > with the below addressed: > > ::: toolkit/mozapps/extensions/test/xpinstall/slowinstall.sjs > (Diff revision 1) > > +function parseQueryString(aQueryString) { > > Can't you use URLSearchParams instead? (not sure if it is available for sjs > files...) Not available in sjs unfortunately. > ::: toolkit/mozapps/extensions/test/xpinstall/slowinstall.sjs > (Diff revision 1) > > + // nsIOutputStream so here we are. > > Did you file a bug? :-) > > This is test code so I don't care about perf so much, but it'd be nice if > there were a good way to do this in prod code, too. Filed bug 1119464

https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/fx-team/rev/be0ad231ea19 https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/fx-team/rev/a24a887963b7 https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/fx-team/rev/2035148cfa4d

https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/be0ad231ea19 https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/a24a887963b7 https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/2035148cfa4d

Did you want to land this on Aurora36 too?

Might as well make that a Beta approval request at this point since it's highly unlikely to get nominated, approved, and landed on Aurora in time for the uplift today.

Comment on attachment 8542828 [details] MozReview Request: bz://1094312/Mossop Approval Request Comment [Feature/regressing bug #]: Bug 1082764 and bug 1093586 [User impact if declined]: Lost test coverage around add-on installation [Describe test coverage new/current, TBPL]: Test running on m-c for [Risks and why]: Very low risk, The bulk of this is test code changes. The product code that is changed is all e10s only code so should never be used on beta. [String/UUID change made/needed]: None

https://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-beta/rev/08f30b223076 https://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-beta/rev/fc494bb31bec https://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-beta/rev/b71146fc0e37