Closed
Bug 1311610
Opened 8 years ago
Closed 8 years ago
[e10s] Can not drag an image into editable area
Categories
(Core :: DOM: Copy & Paste and Drag & Drop, defect)
Tracking
()
People
(Reporter: over68, Assigned: overholt)
References
(Blocks 1 open bug)
Details
(Keywords: multiprocess, regression)
Attachments
(5 files)
(deleted),
image/png
|
Details | |
(deleted),
patch
|
enndeakin
:
review+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
(deleted),
patch
|
gchang
:
approval-mozilla-aurora+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
(deleted),
patch
|
gchang
:
approval-mozilla-beta+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
(deleted),
patch
|
ritu
:
approval-mozilla-release+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
Steps to reproduce:
1. Open data:text/html,<body contenteditable>
2. Drag an image file from the filesystem to content area.
Actual results:
Can not drag an image into editable area.
I thought it was already fixed (bug 1259517). Maybe a new regression.
Comment 2•8 years ago
|
||
I noticed this just yesterday and tried to find a regression range but couldn't find when it worked. Works in beta though.
Keywords: regression
The problem here is that the patch in the bug 1259517 does not fix the bug on Windows.
So this is not a regression, this bug is specific to Windows.
Comment 4•8 years ago
|
||
It doesn't work on Mac for me.
Updated•8 years ago
|
Status: UNCONFIRMED → NEW
status-firefox52:
--- → affected
Ever confirmed: true
Keywords: multiprocess
It seems that the patch in bug 1259517 does not work as expected on all platforms.
Comment 6•8 years ago
|
||
Indeed, I tried the Windows nightly immediately after bug 1259517 landed and the STR from this bug don't work. Blake, can you please take a look or suggestion another owner for this e10s regression?
status-firefox49:
--- → wontfix
status-firefox50:
--- → wontfix
status-firefox51:
--- → affected
Flags: needinfo?(mrbkap)
Comment 7•8 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Neil Deakin from comment #4)
> It doesn't work on Mac for me.
Can you give better STR? On hg revision 9888f1a23 this WFM with the STR from comment 0 (in a debug build on OSX).
I don't have a Windows computer to debug this on. I'm happy to help out if someone wants to debug and see what's up there.
Flags: needinfo?(mrbkap)
Comment 8•8 years ago
|
||
I reproduced on Win10 using just the STR from c0. With e10s off, the image shows up in the contenteditable area. With e10s on, nothing happens.
Assignee | ||
Comment 9•8 years ago
|
||
For some reason I was able to reproduce easily with a clean nightly profile of a downloaded 64-bit build but not in a locally-built 32-bit build. I must have done something wrong.
Assignee | ||
Comment 10•8 years ago
|
||
mconley helped me (thanks!) track down that Components.classes["@mozilla.org/editor-utils;1"].getService(Components.interfaces.nsIEditorUtils) is failing (in both the parent and content processes). It seems this is causing HTMLEditor::InsertObject to bail on http://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/source/editor/libeditor/HTMLEditorDataTransfer.cpp#1074 and thus SlurpBlob isn't being called. Oddly, this works in my local build. Blake, any ideas?
Flags: needinfo?(mrbkap)
Assignee | ||
Comment 11•8 years ago
|
||
We just determined that mconley's local build *does* have it (like mine) but that his downloaded build (like mine) *doesn't*.
Assignee | ||
Comment 12•8 years ago
|
||
Does something need to be in browser/installer/package-manifest.in?
Comment 13•8 years ago
|
||
It does need to be added there, as well as the mobile version.
And we should have a bug to ensure that some build check is done to ensure that added files are added to the installer packages, as this often causes subtle easily missed errors.
Assignee | ||
Comment 14•8 years ago
|
||
I don't know how these files is ordered nor do I know if BINPATH or RESPATH should be used but a try build mystor did for me with BINPATH worked (https://treeherder.mozilla.org/#/jobs?repo=try&revision=231bff8897ca00d14a63555c6f4224c06303af02) :)
I'll file a followup to automate checking for missing additions like this.
Flags: needinfo?(mrbkap)
Attachment #8814497 -
Flags: review?(enndeakin)
Assignee | ||
Updated•8 years ago
|
Assignee: nobody → overholt
Assignee | ||
Comment 15•8 years ago
|
||
I filed bug 1320390 to automate checking for added files in the installer packages.
Updated•8 years ago
|
Attachment #8814497 -
Flags: review?(enndeakin) → review+
Comment 16•8 years ago
|
||
Pushed by eakhgari@mozilla.com:
https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/mozilla-inbound/rev/0c77fbafe811
Add EditorUtils.* to package-manifest; r=enndeakin
Comment 17•8 years ago
|
||
Given how trivial this fix has turned out to be, I'd like to get this back on the radar as a possible 50.1 ride-along.
Also, do we really have no automated tests for EditorUtils?
Comment 18•8 years ago
|
||
Pushed by archaeopteryx@coole-files.de:
https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/mozilla-inbound/rev/b7af3fd1de51
Add EditorUtils.* to package-manifest: Use RESPATH instead of BINPATH to fix OS X bustage. r=bustage-fix
Comment 19•8 years ago
|
||
bugherder |
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/0c77fbafe811
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/b7af3fd1de51
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 8 years ago
status-firefox53:
--- → fixed
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Target Milestone: --- → mozilla53
Hello there, could you please verify this issue is fixed as expected on a latest Nightly build? Thanks!
Flags: needinfo?(over68)
Comment 21•8 years ago
|
||
Verified locally that it works now. Please request Aurora/Beta/Release approval on this when you get a chance.
Reporter | ||
Comment 22•8 years ago
|
||
Confirm this bug has been fixed in the latest Nightly build.
Flags: needinfo?(over68)
Comment 23•8 years ago
|
||
[Tracking Requested - why for this release]:
tracking-firefox50:
--- → ?
tracking-firefox51:
--- → ?
tracking-firefox52:
--- → ?
tracking-firefox53:
--- → ?
Comment 24•8 years ago
|
||
Track 51+/52+ as regression.
Assignee | ||
Comment 25•8 years ago
|
||
Approval Request Comment
[Feature/Bug causing the regression]: missing package-manifest.in entry
[User impact if declined]: dragging and dropping images onto content editable areas won't work in e10s
[Is this code covered by automated tests?]: no
[Has the fix been verified in Nightly?]: yes
[Needs manual test from QE? If yes, steps to reproduce]: see comment 0
[List of other uplifts needed for the feature/fix]: none
[Is the change risky?]: I don't think so
[Why is the change risky/not risky?]:
[String changes made/needed]:
Flags: needinfo?(overholt)
Attachment #8815966 -
Flags: approval-mozilla-aurora?
Assignee | ||
Comment 26•8 years ago
|
||
Approval Request Comment
[Feature/Bug causing the regression]: missing package-manifest.in entry
[User impact if declined]: dragging and dropping images onto content editable areas won't work in e10s
[Is this code covered by automated tests?]: no
[Has the fix been verified in Nightly?]: yes
[Needs manual test from QE? If yes, steps to reproduce]: yes, see comment 0
[List of other uplifts needed for the feature/fix]: none
[Is the change risky?]: I don't think so
[Why is the change risky/not risky?]: just adding missing files to the packaged builds
[String changes made/needed]: none
Attachment #8815967 -
Flags: approval-mozilla-beta?
Assignee | ||
Comment 27•8 years ago
|
||
[Feature/Bug causing the regression]: missing package-manifest.in entry
[User impact if declined]: dragging and dropping images onto content editable areas won't work in e10s
[Is this code covered by automated tests?]: no
[Has the fix been verified in Nightly?]: yes
[Needs manual test from QE? If yes, steps to reproduce]: yes, see comment 0
[List of other uplifts needed for the feature/fix]: none
[Is the change risky?]: I don't think so
[Why is the change risky/not risky?]: just adding missing files to the packaged builds
[String changes made/needed]: none
Attachment #8815969 -
Flags: approval-mozilla-release?
Comment 28•8 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8815967 [details] [diff] [review]
patch for beta
Fix an issue related to e10s about dragging image. Beta51+ and Aurora52+. Should be in 51 beta 6.
Attachment #8815967 -
Flags: approval-mozilla-beta? → approval-mozilla-beta+
Updated•8 years ago
|
Attachment #8815966 -
Flags: approval-mozilla-aurora? → approval-mozilla-aurora+
Updated•8 years ago
|
Flags: qe-verify+
Comment 29•8 years ago
|
||
Comment 30•8 years ago
|
||
bugherder uplift |
Comment on attachment 8815969 [details] [diff] [review]
patch for release
Critical regression, let's include in 50.1.0
Attachment #8815969 -
Flags: approval-mozilla-release? → approval-mozilla-release+
Comment 32•8 years ago
|
||
bugherder uplift |
Comment 33•8 years ago
|
||
This issue is VERIFIED FIXED in Firefox Aurora 52.0a2 (id: 20161228004005), Firefox Beta 51.b10 (id: 20161222080852) and Firefox Release 50.1.0 (id: 20161208153507) on a WINDOWS 10 x64 machine.
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•