Closed
Bug 396833
Opened 17 years ago
Closed 17 years ago
"WARNING: nsAppShell::Exit() called redundantly" on shutdown
Categories
(Core :: Widget: Cocoa, defect)
Tracking
()
RESOLVED
FIXED
People
(Reporter: jruderman, Assigned: Waldo)
References
Details
(Keywords: regression)
Attachments
(1 file)
(deleted),
patch
|
roc
:
review+
roc
:
superreview+
roc
:
approval1.9+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
Steps to reproduce: 1. Start a debug build of Firefox (from the command line). 2. Click on the Firefox window to focus it. 3. Cmd+Q. Result: ###!!! ASSERTION: nsAppShell::Exit() called redundantly: '!mTerminated', file /Users/jruderman/trunk/mozilla/widget/src/cocoa/nsAppShell.mm, line 490 I don't know why this didn't turn Tinderboxen orange. Does this not happen there, or do they use a different method to quit?
Flags: blocking1.9?
Comment 1•17 years ago
|
||
This is an old problem. It's just that my patch has started complaining about it. Here's the source-code comment above the assertion: // This method is currently called more than once -- from (according to // mento) an nsAppExitEvent dispatched by nsAppStartup::Quit() and from an // XPCOM shutdown notification that nsBaseAppShell has registered to // receive. So we need to ensure that multiple calls won't break anything. // But we should also complain about it (since it isn't quite kosher).
Steven - what is your recommendation about making this a blocker bug? Is this just a warning that we can ignore or silence or something we need to actually fix?
Comment 3•17 years ago
|
||
It's an old, old bug (I saw it when I first started working on the appshell back in April). I don't believe it has any user-visible consequences (otherwise somebody else would have discovered it, too). It may be a sign of something else wrong that's more serious. But for itself it's really not worth blocking on. I actually now regret putting in the assertion. Should I get rid of it?
Reporter | ||
Comment 4•17 years ago
|
||
Yes, please. A bug report should be enough of a reminder that the bug exists.
Lets get rid of the assertion and leave a comment.
Flags: blocking1.9? → blocking1.9-
Assignee | ||
Comment 6•17 years ago
|
||
This assertion is the only assertion firing on the Mac debug+leak tinderbox, and it is the only bug preventing assertions from being fatal on that box.
Comment 7•17 years ago
|
||
You could also change the assertion to a warning.
Assignee | ||
Comment 8•17 years ago
|
||
Attachment #281841 -
Flags: superreview+
Attachment #281841 -
Flags: review?(joshmoz)
Attachment #281841 -
Flags: review+
Attachment #281841 -
Flags: approval1.9+
BTW you can write this more simply using NS_WARN_IF_FALSE
Assignee | ||
Comment 10•17 years ago
|
||
Ah, didn't know about that macro, and didn't read the second comment until after I committed. In any case, tho, I think this is actually a little more readable, because to use that you need a double-negative. I'll let Jesse decide whether to mark this bug fixed or to morph it to not hit the warning, as it's blocking his console-spam bug (and we didn't get rid of the console spam, only changed it).
Reporter | ||
Updated•17 years ago
|
Keywords: assertion
Summary: "ASSERTION: nsAppShell::Exit() called redundantly" on shutdown → "WARNING: nsAppShell::Exit() called redundantly" on shutdown
Comment 11•17 years ago
|
||
Jesse, please reopen or file a new bug if there's more to do here.
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 17 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Reporter | ||
Comment 12•17 years ago
|
||
Ok, I filed bug 402497 on fixing the warning.
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•