found using 2001.12.13.14 comm bits on linux. 1. go to http://www.mozilla.org/ 2. bring up a context menu over any of the links and select Save Link As 3. attempt to save the file to a directory that doesn't have write privs. result: download progress briefly appears then goes away. this kinda implies that the file is saved. so, i check the target directory and noticed that the file was not saved. expected: as with having no read privs to a directory, an error dlg should appear saying that it's unable to save due to lack of write privs. could someone check if something similar to this also occurs on win32? i tried this out on the winNT build [2001.12.13.16 comm] using a locked floppy disk --and i did get an error saying that it was unable to write-- but i'm not sure if it's the same kind of scenario. also tried this out on Mac OS X [2001.12.13.04], and it looks like it does the right thing: for 755, i can view the dir, but am prevented from actually saving there. [and for 700, i cannot even view the dir contents, as expected.]

27609 expressly states it covers permission save issues. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 27609 ***

actually, i believe this is a regression --at least on linux it used to work [would get error dlg] before ben's checkins, iirc... but i'll dbl-check this later on when i get back to the office, just to be sure.

poked around my home machine and i think i found an old enough build [2001.12.11.08] to compare with a recent one [2001.12.28.08]. i noticed that the behavior --at least on linux-- differs btwn dirs with 700 and 755 privs: a. testing save to a 700 dir: in both the older and recent builds, i do get a error dlg saying i don't have permission to access the dir, "You don't have permissions necessary to view this directory." b. testing save to a 755 dir: i. with the older build, i do get an error dialog [as expected], but its phrasing differs: "There was an error writing to the target location." ii. with the recent build, i don't get an error dialog at all. the failure is silent. reopening bug, since this appears to be a regression based on my observation (b-ii). also clarifying summary.

*** Bug 118605 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

This is fixed by the patch in bug 114399.

okay --adding dep to check this once 114399 is fixed.

*** Bug 119408 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

-> .9.9 given the patch in 114399

bug 114399 checked in. This should be fixed, I think.... Please test tomorrow's builds.

question: could bug 120307 be related to this...?

dang it, i confused this with bug 115154. sorry about that.

yeah, this looks fixed using 2002.01.23.08 comm bits on linux rh7.2. marking as such --but do reopen if there are other snags!

zap