http://tinderbox.mozilla.org/showlog.cgi?log=SeaMonkey/1328740940.1328745964.22504.gz WINNT 5.2 comm-central-trunk debug test mochitest-other on 2012/02/08 14:42:20 { ... TEST-PASS | chrome://mochitests/content/browser/suite/common/tests/browser/browser_346337.js | The value for "//input[@type='file'][2]" was correctly restored WARNING: RestoreFromHistory failed: file e:/builds/slave/comm-cen-trunk-w32-dbg/build/mozilla/docshell/base/nsDocShell.cpp, line 6755 ###!!! ASSERTION: aIndex is out of range: 'aIndex < mLength', file e:/builds/slave/comm-cen-trunk-w32-dbg/build/mozilla/docshell/shistory/src/nsSHistory.cpp, line 957 TEST-UNEXPECTED-FAIL | chrome://mochitests/content/browser/suite/common/tests/browser/browser_346337.js | Test timed out } PS: Reproduced locally while fixing bug 725529. *** Then this test "leaks" into following ones, as in { TEST-UNEXPECTED-FAIL | chrome://mochitests/content/browser/suite/common/tests/browser/browser_522545.js | an unexpected uncaught JS exception reported through window.onerror - ok is not defined at chrome://mochitests/content/browser/suite/common/tests/browser/browser_346337.js:141 }

This is what I figured from the main difference between our test and FF's. Note: I haven't checked the follow-up errors, but only running this test alone.

Comment on attachment 596340 [details] [diff] [review] patch [Checkin: Comments 13, 18 and 19] I confirm this fixes this bug locally :-) But I have no idea why this test used some 'pageshow' (in SM) instead of 'load' (in FF) in the first place. While looking at this patch, I noticed and filed bug 726505, which I would like to do first, just in case.

(In reply to Serge Gautherie (:sgautherie) from comment #2) > While looking at this patch, I noticed and filed bug 726505, which I would > like to do first, just in case. This patch is still needed, even after fixing bug 726505.

Comment on attachment 596340 [details] [diff] [review] patch [Checkin: Comments 13, 18 and 19] This test and the Firefox one look substantially different, even with the event change as given in the patch, so I can't tell how our test works at all, sorry.

Serge, I guess either you need to turn your f+ into an r+, or we need to find another reviewer (who?), or remove this test.

Perhaps Misak can remember why the tests differ so much?

(In reply to neil@parkwaycc.co.uk from comment #4) > I can't tell how our test works at all, sorry. Can you give a rs+, as you reviewed bug 480109? (Or suggest another reviewer?) (In reply to Jens Hatlak (:InvisibleSmiley) from comment #5) > Serge, I guess either you need to turn your f+ into an r+ Well, I don't think/remember I'm allowed to give r+ (on anything). Ian, correct me if I'm wrong. (In reply to Philip Chee from comment #6) > Perhaps Misak can remember why the tests differ so much? Yeah, but it looks like Misak hasn't been active/responsive since last november 2011 meeting :-/

(In reply to Serge Gautherie (:sgautherie) from comment #7) > (In reply to Jens Hatlak (:InvisibleSmiley) from comment #5) > > Serge, I guess either you need to turn your f+ into an r+ > > Well, I don't think/remember I'm allowed to give r+ (on anything). If that is true (it might be), I think this needs to be changed, considering that you probably have the most test experience and the FF guys even commit stuff with "a=testonly" and no (obvious) review at all. If we have failing tests and someone (e.g. you) can tell that a fix is correct, by all means that should suffice (IMHO). Writing new tests is probably another story, though, but that's not what I'm up to here.

> If that is true (it might be), I think this needs to be changed, considering that you > probably have the most test experience and the FF guys even commit stuff with > "a=testonly" and no (obvious) review at all. And I've seen Firefox test only changes go in without even a bug number. So given Serge's experience with tests I think he is already a de facto seamonkey-tests peer so he can give r+ if needed.

(In reply to Philip Chee from comment #9) > So given Serge's experience with tests I think he is already a de facto > seamonkey-tests peer so he can give r+ if needed. Ian, if you think this needs a vote, please take this up with the Council, otherwise integrate into what you are working on. Thanks!

(In reply to Jens Hatlak (:InvisibleSmiley) from comment #10) > (In reply to Philip Chee from comment #9) > > So given Serge's experience with tests I think he is already a de facto > > seamonkey-tests peer so he can give r+ if needed. > > Ian, if you think this needs a vote, please take this up with the Council, > otherwise integrate into what you are working on. Thanks! This doesn't need a vote, I am happy for Serge's f+ = r+

Comment on attachment 596340 [details] [diff] [review] patch [Checkin: Comments 13, 18 and 19] Then, even if we don't (bother to) have a full understanding of this test code, this patch fixes the failure and makes the test somewhat closer to Firefox code, so f+ -> r+.

Comment on attachment 596340 [details] [diff] [review] patch [Checkin: Comments 13, 18 and 19] http://hg.mozilla.org/comm-central/rev/650205a133cd

Comment on attachment 596340 [details] [diff] [review] patch [Checkin: Comments 13, 18 and 19] [Approval Request Comment] Test-only, wanted to clear the timeout and the rest.

http://tinderbox.mozilla.org/showlog.cgi?log=SeaMonkey/1329271174.1329275384.15583.gz&fulltext=1 Linux comm-central-trunk debug test mochitest-other on 2012/02/14 17:59:34 V.Fixed, test + warning + assertion + etc!

Comment on attachment 596340 [details] [diff] [review] patch [Checkin: Comments 13, 18 and 19] WoooHooo clearing timeouts means more time to spend on the machines actually doing stuff! p.s.: I agree with |So given Serge's experience with tests I think he is already a de facto seamonkey-tests peer so he can give r+ if needed.|

Err he's now a de jure seamonkey-tests peer. http://www.seamonkey-project.org/dev/project-areas https://wiki.mozilla.org/Modules/SeaMonkey#Cross-Suite_Components

Comment on attachment 596340 [details] [diff] [review] patch [Checkin: Comments 13, 18 and 19] http://hg.mozilla.org/releases/comm-aurora/rev/4138254af9bf

http://tinderbox.mozilla.org/showlog.cgi?log=SeaMonkey-Aurora/1331173545.1331178886.17486.gz Linux comm-aurora debug test mochitest-other on 2012/03/07 18:25:45 http://tinderbox.mozilla.org/showlog.cgi?log=SeaMonkey-Beta/1331186022.1331189779.1265.gz OS X 10.5 comm-beta debug test mochitest-other on 2012/03/07 21:53:42 seamonkey2.9 and seamonkey2.8: verified.