LDAP autocomplete doesn't inform the user in the event that there are no matches, the server cannot be found, or the LDAP service is not running on the unspecified port/unreachable. While these are 3 separate issues, they fall under the general category of no error reporting. Steps to reproduce Scenario 1: no matches 1. Set up autocomplete against corporate directory. 2. Open new composition window. 3. Enter totally impossible name that shouldn't match (e.g. "thisisanamethatmustnotexist") Expected Results Autocomplete widget should report "No matches" Actual Results Silently fails without any feedback to user. Scenario 2: server is unknown 1. create a fake LDAP server in preferences 2. configure autocomplete to use the fake LDAP server 3. open composition window 4. enter name Expected Results Error "Cannot reach server" or similar Actual Results Silently fails without feedback to the user. Scenario 3: server down/unreachable 1. create a real LDAP server in preferences, but change port number to the wrong port (e.g. 12345) 2. configure autocomplete to use the LDAP server 3. open composition window 4. enter name Expected Results Error "Cannot reach server" or similar Actual Results Silently fails without feedback to the user, and text entry becomes unresponsive.

Raising this severity to critical. This is impacting testing as we have NO idea what's going wrong if typedown fails. It could be anything from the server being down to a typo in the DN, server name or anything. We urgently need SOME form of error feedback to the user.

As far as I can tell, this isn't done in the local addrbook complete, presumably because it's much less likely to be an issue there. Since the autocomplete widget itself may LDAP autocomplete only or addressbook _and_ LDAP autocomplete (and potentially in the future multiple LDAP sessions), it'd be good to get some feedback on what this might look like. Potentially, some of the code could live in the autocomplete widget itself.

Part of the fix to this may be to make some relevant logging go through the nsIConsoleService rather than PR_LOG. What did 4.x do with regard to this sort of error-handling?

Here are some examples of error conditions and error msgs in 4.x. 1. No matches displays the typed text, appends the default domain name (taken from your Identity), and the message <No matches found>. ex.: dgp2938 yields dgp2938@netscape.com <No matches found> hogwash bunkum yields hogwash@netscape.com, bunkum@netscape.com <No matches found> astdast, astdavat yields <No matches found> 2. Server is unknown/unreachable: Popup dialog with the msg: Failed to bind to <DIRECTORY> due to LDAP error 'Can't connect to the LDAP server' (0x5B) Clearly the hex return code is very ugly... and this code also appears to be part of generic LDAP code and not in the autocmplete code itself as it also appears in an address book query that fails.

cc'ing Robin for suggestions with error message text.

For scenario 1 (no matches), we should provide similar feedback as did Communicator, e.g., <no matches found> (see Hong's first example above). For scenario 2 (server unknown), here's a stab at the error message text: "Could not connect to the LDAP server <server name>. The server is not recognized. Check the LDAP settings for this account and try again." For scenario 3 (server is down): "Could not connect to the LDAP server <server name>. The server is not available. Try again later."

As much as this sucks, we don't see any way to complete this work in time to land it for 0.9.2 and 0.9.3 given all the bugs that need to be fixed.

For future reference (whenever this bug gets fixed) ... It's probably better to use complete English sentences in this case, since it would look a lot more professional and wouldn't require that many more words. Thus: (2) `The directory "Foo" cannot be searched, because the server "ldap.foo.bar" cannot be found. Check the server name in your Account Settings, and try again.' (3) `The directory "Foo" cannot be searched, because the server "ldap.foo.bar" is not responding. Enter complete addresses yourself, or try again later.' The error message should be shown in a floating window at the side of the screen (like the error windows used in Apple Remote Access), not in an alert box. An alert box would be infuriating for a user who knew very well that the server was down and who was just trying to enter an e-mail address only to have focus taken away from the text field.

If the messages can be made terse enough yet still intelligible to most folks, perhaps they could simply show up as non-selectible items colored red in the dropdown menu?

That would work, though it would look bizarre. :-]

*** Bug 92290 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

we're going to try and get some poor version (probably making the errors appear in the dropdown) in for 0.9.4. It's a bit odd, but it's better than the current state of affairs: no feedback at all.

Is there absolutely no way to pop up a dialog box? The error msgs showing up in the address field seems totally weird. Jennifer, do you have any ideas on what the UI should look like for this?

Take a look at bug 92135. It has UI related information. My attachment is what I suppose it should look like.

Agree with hong it might seem odd to have error msgs in the dropdown. I'm not sure what the right thing for this is. Myroslav's idea is interesting. Maybe the server icon could have a red "X" through it to indicate its unavailable and "<unable to connect>" text? See attachment below.

Changed icon is excellent idea! IMHO Autocomplete list is the best pace for error reporting. 1) Messagebox is annoying in the case the server is temporary down (for maintanace). What if several LDAP servers are down? 2) Status bar is just not noticeable and the same question about several servers. 3) autocomplete list would be silent (not annoying) and noticeable (if icon has red cross) place. It sould be informative as well.

Also, the menu item should be disable to avoid the user to select it!

from Myroslav Opyr <MyrOpyr@org.lviv.net> I have an idea: The item could be selectable and click on item with error message would show a transcript of LDAP communication. Details about error code and error message. Something like: ====================================== Error: [LDAP] Could not connect server OK Details >> Server: ldap.netscape.com Error code: ERRCODE Error Message: ERRMSG Transcript: blah-blah-blah ====================================== This cold become general error message for all Mozilla errors. I get error: "Cannot send mail" but finding out why takes me ages. It would be really easy to take a gasp on a transcript and find out that recepient domain was mistyped!

I like ducarroz's suggestion to provide details on the "unable to connect" error. Just displaying the error message alone in the autocomplete list is of limited value to the user, whereas providing them with a way to see the error details and possibly take corrective action has a much higher value.

Well.. can we spec the winning proposal? It would be great to get this in for 0.9.4, although considering it is a P3 this may be unlikely.

I'm still not a fan of showing error reporting in the dropdown itself. I think that if an error is made in configuring an LDAP directory, we should pop up a dialog, because that's pretty much a show stopper for that particular operation. The dropdown is the best place for *suggestions,* meaining, it's not necesarily the best place for debugging your settings. However, I feel for ya Hong! :-)

kmurray: the errors being referred to here are runtime or network ones, things that can't be detected at configuration time, so that's not really an option. For enterprise customers, not being able to debug at all is a non-starter, and myroslav's suggestion with jglick's icon changes seems to be both workable and non-awkward, so I'm hacking on a patch in that direction.

I was contacted over email by Myroslav with a request to add his comments here. ----begin Myroslav's comments----------- Imagine the case LDAP server is down for maintanace. And I am using my Mozilla to write a lot of mail messages. Do I have to get error in the form of messagebox each time I press a key in address field? Each time I am composing the letter? Something else? There are mirriads of reasons why a problem during access to LDAP server can be. Having connected to Four11, I will have problems (in form of messageboxes) regularily due to network congestions and other stuff which usually don't touch me. Majority of my addresses are in my personal addressbook/collected addressbook why temporary problems with LDAP should irritate me (in form of messageboxes)? See bug 92135 for discussion and screenshots of proposals (they look cute and appear not annoying). ----end Myroslav comments---- Now, my comments to his comments: I guess I don't disagree with the benefit to most advanced users, but to novice and intermediate users? If we add the commentary in the dropdown, it just seems like too much info in the dropdown to me. I did like the red 'X' (I think it's 92135) on the icon showing that there was an error with that particular directory, though. But, I can live with the additional info in the dropdown, because I'm hearing a real user benefit (in Myroslav's case) is driving the feedback. I'm not sure if Four11 still offers the ability to add their directory to the address book, but if that starts to take off, I think error reporting will wind up confusing those types of users (in this case only, don't hold me to that in other cases ;-) ). So, specific to Myroslav's example of Four11, I think the right thing to do is fail silently, so as not to confuse the less-savvy users out there.

Ideally, it would be nice to be able to do something like mpt suggested on 6-26, but that currently isn't possible. As Myroslav mentions, an error dialog is intrusive since it could potentially pop up each time a user adds an address to a mail message. Users don't notice text in the status bar. Not doing anything is no good either if the user is relying on the feature. I would suggest giving "unavailable icon/text" idea a shot and getting feedback. Kevin, I know you're worried about it being obtrusive, but given the options, i think we should give this a chance. 1. It would be always at the end of the list, so out of the user's way. 2. Keep it simple: "Icon <unable to connect> Name of Directory" 3. I like Myroslav's idea (2001-08-17, by Jean-Francois Ducarroz) about being able to select the item and getting more information. 4. For the icon, file a separate bug again "marlon@netscape.com" and ask him to create this icon for both Modern and Classic (he is the visual designer who did the Modern graphics).

Just filed bug 98316 to about the icons.

Comment on attachment 49555 [details] [diff] [review] LDAP XPCOM SDK changes to support err msgs, v1 >Index: base/public/nsILDAPErrors.idl >=================================================================== >RCS file: /cvsroot/mozilla/directory/xpcom/base/public/nsILDAPErrors.idl,v >retrieving revision 1.1 >diff -u -r1.1 nsILDAPErrors.idl >--- nsILDAPErrors.idl 2001/03/09 03:24:13 1.1 >+++ nsILDAPErrors.idl 2001/09/17 04:25:46 >@@ -227,3 +227,249 @@ > const long REFERRAL_LIMIT_EXCEEDED = 0x61; > }; > >+/* >+ * Map these errors codes into the nsresult namespace in C++ >+ */ >+%{C++ >+ >+#define NS_ERROR_LDAP_OPERATIONS_ERROR \ >+ NS_ERROR_GENERATE_FAILURE(NS_ERROR_MODULE_LDAP, \ >+ nsILDAPErrors::OPERATIONS_ERROR) ... I think a more generic solution would've been to use: #define NS_ERROR_LDAP(_type) \ NS_ERROR_GENERATE_FAILURE(NS_ERROR_MODULE_LDAP, \ nsILDAPErrors::##_type) We've discussed this in #mozilla, up to you whether to fix it or not. >Index: base/public/nsILDAPMessage.idl >=================================================================== >RCS file: /cvsroot/mozilla/directory/xpcom/base/public/nsILDAPMessage.idl,v >retrieving revision 1.11 >diff -u -r1.11 nsILDAPMessage.idl >--- nsILDAPMessage.idl 2001/05/17 06:26:32 1.11 >+++ nsILDAPMessage.idl 2001/09/17 04:25:46 >@@ -35,6 +35,11 @@ > #include "nsISupports.idl" > #include "nsILDAPOperation.idl" > >+/* hack around XPIDL bug 78848; when that's fixed, this can disappear */ >+%{C++ >+#include "nsAWritableString.h" >+%} >+ #include "nsAString.h" >Index: base/resources/content/contents.rdf >=================================================================== >RCS file: contents.rdf >diff -N contents.rdf >--- /dev/null Wed Apr 26 15:53:02 2000 >+++ contents.rdf Sun Sep 16 21:25:46 2001 >@@ -0,0 +1,19 @@ >+<?xml version="1.0"?> >+<RDF:RDF xmlns:RDF="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" >+ xmlns:chrome="http://www.mozilla.org/rdf/chrome#"> >+ >+ <!-- list all the packages being supplied --> >+ <RDF:Seq about="urn:mozilla:package:root"> >+ <RDF:li resource="urn:mozilla:package:mozldap"/> >+ </RDF:Seq> >+ >+ <!-- package information --> >+ <RDF:Description about="urn:mozilla:package:mozldap" >+ chrome:displayName="MozLDAP" >+ chrome:author="mozilla.org" >+ chrome:name="mozldap" >+ chrome:localeVersion="0.9.4"> 0.9.5 now? >Index: base/resources/locale/en-US/MANIFEST >=================================================================== >RCS file: MANIFEST >diff -N MANIFEST >--- /dev/null Wed Apr 26 15:53:02 2000 >+++ MANIFEST Sun Sep 16 21:25:46 2001 >@@ -0,0 +1 @@ >+ldapErrors.properties This isn't needed any longer, all platforms use jar.mn these days. >Index: base/resources/locale/en-US/ldapErrors.properties >=================================================================== >RCS file: ldapErrors.properties >diff -N ldapErrors.properties >--- /dev/null Wed Apr 26 15:53:02 2000 >+++ ldapErrors.properties Sun Sep 16 21:25:46 2001 >@@ -0,0 +1,279 @@ >+# ... >+# >+# Contributor(s): Dan Mosedale <dmose@netscape.com> (Original Author) >+# Chuck Boatwright <cboatwri@netscape.com> >+# I believe most files have it formatted like this: # Contributor(s): # Dan Mosedale <dmose@netscape.com> (Original Author) # Chuck Boatwright <cboatwri@netscape.com> It leaves a bit more space for those longer e-mail addresses. r=jag

Comment on attachment 49556 [details] [diff] [review] Theme changes to support error icons, v1 >Index: themes/classic/jar.mn >=================================================================== >RCS file: /cvsroot/mozilla/themes/classic/jar.mn,v >retrieving revision 1.61 >diff -u -r1.61 jar.mn >--- jar.mn 2001/09/05 02:20:34 1.61 >+++ jar.mn 2001/09/17 04:38:22 >@@ -482,6 +482,7 @@ > skin/classic/messenger/addressbook/person.gif (messenger/addressbook/person.gif) > skin/classic/messenger/addressbook/property.gif (messenger/addressbook/property.gif) > skin/classic/messenger/addressbook/remote-abook.gif (messenger/addressbook/remote-abook.gif) >+ skin/classic/messenger/addressbook/remote-abook-down.gif (messenger/addressbook/remote-abook-down.gif) > skin/classic/messenger/addressbook/searchold-disabled.gif (messenger/addressbook/searchold-disabled.gif) > skin/classic/messenger/addressbook/searchold-hover-active.gif (messenger/addressbook/searchold-hover-active.gif) > skin/classic/messenger/addressbook/searchold-hover.gif (messenger/addressbook/searchold-hover.gif) Tab fu? Have hewitt look at your css. It looks fine, but I wouldn't mind someone with more experience looking at it. r=jag

Comment on attachment 49567 [details] [diff] [review] Themes changes to support error icons, v2 This fixes the spacing problem that jag noticed.

Comment on attachment 49568 [details] [diff] [review] LDAP XPCOM SDK changes for err msgs, v2 OK, this new patch gets rid of the MANIFEST file, and fixes nsAWritableString -> nsAString. As far as the license boilerplate format goes, this code matches the rest of the LDAP XPCOM SDK (as well as all the other files I've written :-). I'm gonna leave the macros as is for now. The version in contents.rdf is actually in sync with everything else currently in the tree. Apparently someone whacks those files en masses with a script once per milestone.

Some comments on the XPFE patch: @@ -831,8 +880,14 @@ // determine which value to place in the textbox this.ignoreInputEvent = true; if (selected != null) { - this.value = this.getResultValueAt(selected); - this.mTransientValue = true; + if (this.getSessionStatusAt(selected) == + Components.interfaces.nsIAutoCompleteStatus.failureItems) { + this.value = this.currentSearchString; + this.mTransientValue = true; + } else { + this.value = this.getResultValueAt(selected); + this.mTransientValue = true; You can leave the "this.mTransientValue = true" line outside of the if clause since it will be set to true regardless of each condition. @@ -943,6 +998,7 @@ <body><![CDATA[ for (var name in this.mSessions) this.mLastResults[name] = null; + this.mLastStatus[name] = null; ]]></body> </method> You need to add brackets to this block, since prior to your change there was only one line inside the loop block.

we want this on the branch. Adding nsbranch+ and chofmann to cc.

My understanding is that the 5 general messages are those that might appear in the autocomplete dropdown menu when there is a problem with the ldap server. The 97 specific error messages are what the user might see if they selected one of the general messages from the dropdown autocomplete list in order to get more details. Showing the general error message as the title of the more specific error dialog is good. For the 5 general messages that appear in the autocomplete dropdown, is it possible to include brackets around them to distinguish them from actual results? For example, "<Error connecting to LDAP server>". (similar to screenshot http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/showattachment.cgi?attach_id=46237). I think this might help users learn to quickly separate the error indicator from the actual results. Also, I'm thinking maybe we want to say "Unable to connect/communicate/search LDAP server" instead of "Error connecting/communicating/searching...". Less intimidating for some users that way. Users who are interesting in the details can select the item and get a more accurate reason. As for the 97 specific messages, boy thats a lot! I'll leave this up to Robin's expertise, but you might want to say something like, "Unable to connect/contact/search the <name> LDAP directory because <insert reason here, such as 'a protocol error occurred'>. Please try again later or contact your <somebody> for assistance."

Comment on attachment 49566 [details] [diff] [review] Changes to mailnews code, v1 R=ducarroz

> My understanding is that the 5 general messages are those that might appear in > the autocomplete dropdown menu when there is a problem with the ldap server. > > The 97 specific error messages are what the user might see if they selected > one of the general messages from the dropdown autocomplete list in order to > get more details. Correct. > For the 5 general messages that appear in the autocomplete dropdown, is it > possible to include brackets around them to distinguish them from actual > results? For example, "<Error connnecting to LDAP server>". (similar to > screenshot http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/showattachment.cgi?attach_id=46237). > I think this might help users learn to quickly separate the error indicator > from the actual results. Sure; this is an easy change to make.

> Also, I'm thinking maybe we want to say "Unable to connect/communicate/search > LDAP server" instead of "Error connecting/communicating/searching...". Less > intimidating for some users that way. Users who are interesting in the details > can select the item and get a more accurate reason. True, it's less intimidating, but it's also somewhat misleading: eg "Unable to communicate" will typically not be true: the communication will have started, and the error will have happened part way through the communication. Would changing "Error..." to "Problem..." be sufficient to ease the intimidation factor? > As for the 97 specific messages, boy thats a lot! I'll leave this up to > Robin's expertise, but you might want to say something like, "Unable to > connect/contact/search the <name> LDAP directory because <insert reason here, > such as 'a protocol error occurred'>. Please try again later or contact your > <somebody> for assistance." Right; the premise here is that even though many end-users won't find these specific reasons terribly meaningful, they'll be able to call their sysadmin or helpdesk, who will be able to use this message to help figure out what's going on. So I think it's important that we make the 97 messages available. Using them in a sentence like you suggest sounds good, though it may complicate the code somewhat because of the way that stuff needs to be internationalized. I also don't know if nsIPrompt supports wrapping text or not. I'll check into these things. Robin: to answer your question from mail, the 5 (currently 3) general error messages tell approximately what part of the communication was taking place when the error happened, which gives a general diagnostic clue. The specific error messages talk about what exactly went wrong.

Re: ------- Additional Comments From jglick@netscape.com 2001-09-17 13:03 ------- >As for the 97 specific messages, boy thats a lot! I'll leave this up to Robin's >expertise, but you might want to say something like, "Unable to >connect/contact/search the <name> LDAP directory because <insert reason here, >such as 'a protocol error occurred'>. Please try again later or contact your ><somebody> for assistance." For the general form of the error message, I'd suggest the following: "The LDAP directory <name> cannot be searched because <insert error here>. Please <insert corrective action here> and try again. Dan, using the detail list of 97 possible errors, I'll work with you on the wording for the <insert error here> and <insert corrective action here> phrases.

> Would changing "Error..." to "Problem..." be sufficient to ease > the intimidation factor? Whatever you and Robin agree is more appropriate is fine with me. :-) >Using them in a sentence like you suggest sounds good, though it may complicate >the code somewhat because of the way that stuff needs to be internationalized. >I also don't know if nsIPrompt supports wrapping text or not. I'll check into >these things. Thanks. If its doable, sentence format that tells the user what went wrong and how to possibly fix it would be a plus.

Dan and I reviewed the error message text for the 97 error codes. In reviewing them, we concluded that there are only 10 error conditions in which the user can take some corrective action. For these, I've proposed the following error message text. We thought that including the error code would help to provide the sys admin with as much info as possible when diagnosing the error for the end-user. "Error code 3: Time limit exceeded. Please try again later, or else contact your System Administrator." "Error code 8: Strong authentication required. Strong authentication is not currently supported." "Error code 21: Invalid search filter syntax. Verify that the search filter is correct, and then try again, or else contact your System Administrator. To verify that the search filter is correct, from the Edit menu, choose Preferences, then choose Mail & Newsgroups, and then choose Addressing. Click Edit Directories, and select the LDAP server being used. Click Edit, and then click Advanced to display the Search Filter." "Error code 32: No such object. Verify that the Base DN is correct, and then try again, or else contact your System Administrator. To verify that the Base DN is correct, from the Edit menu, choose Preferences, then choose Mail & Newsgroups, and then choose Addressing. Click Edit Directories, and select the LDAP server being used. Click Edit to display the Base DN." "Error code 51: The LDAP server is busy. Please try again later." "Error code 81: Can't contact the LDAP server. Verify that the Hostname and Port Number are correct, and then try again, or else contact your System Administrator. To verify that the Hostname and Port Number are correct, from the Edit menu, choose Preferences, then choose Mail & Newsgroups, and then choose Addressing. Click Edit Directories, and select the LDAP server being used. Click Edit to display the Hostname. Click Advanced to display the Port Number." Error code 85: The LDAP server timed out. Please try again later. Error code 87: Invalid search filter. Verify that the search filter is correct, and then try again, or else contact your System Administrator. To verify that the search filter is correct, from the Edit menu, choose Preferences, then choose Mail & Newsgroups, and then choose Addressing. Click Edit Directories, and select the LDAP server being used. Click Edit, and then click Advanced to display the Search Filter. Error code 90: Out of memory. Please close some other applications and try again. Error code 91: Can't connect to the LDAP server. Verify that the Hostname and Port Number are correct, and then try again, or else contact your System Administrator. To verify that the Hostname and Port Number are correct, from the Edit menu, choose Preferences, then choose Mail & Newsgroups, and then choose Addressing. Click Edit Directories, and select the LDAP server being used. Click Edit to display the Hostname. Click Advanced to display the Port Number. For the rest of the error messages, we came up with the general form for the error message as follows: "Error code <error #, for example, 19>: <error text here, for example, constraint violation>. " "Please contact your System Administrator."

Comment on attachment 49930 [details] [diff] [review] LDAP XPCOM SDK changes to support error strings, v3 A couple of tiny error string changes suggested by robinf.

Comment on attachment 49931 [details] [diff] [review] XPFE autocomplete changes, v2 Has hewitt's autocomplete changes, and updates the properties file messages with messages from robinf.

Comment on attachment 49933 [details] [diff] [review] changes to mail/news code, v2 nsIAbLDAPAutoCompFormatter::FormatException() has been reworked to use provide more an error / hint combination as suggested by robinf. awRecipientErrorCommand has been cleaned up as well.

The new set of patches also has been updated to work with the tip after Leif's async DNS changes, as well as to put <angle brackets> around the general error in the dropdown.

Comment on attachment 49933 [details] [diff] [review] changes to mail/news code, v2 R=ducarroz

Comment on attachment 50000 [details] [diff] [review] LDAP XPCOM SDK changes for err msgs Only difference here is license boilerplate changes in the newly created files.

Comment on attachment 50002 [details] [diff] [review] XPFE autocomplete changes, v3 There small changes here: license boilerplate in new files, one line fix for nsLDAPAUtoCompleteSession::Finish to set defaultIndex to -1 on errors, and tweaks to autocomplete.xml to force it to open a popup if there are failureItems, even if the total number of items is less than minResultsForPopup.

[s]r=hewitt

Comment on attachment 50036 [details] [diff] [review] mailnews changes, v3 Tiny tweak to make the Mac compiler happy.

Comment on attachment 50040 [details] [diff] [review] LDAP XPCOM SDK changes, v5 Another tiny tweak: one makefile.win had the wrong DEPTH.

wow, when i read those long text error messages I thought those would make great html/xul inline error pages. clicking on words could jump straight to the relevant pref panel instead of making people follow long directions.

Comment on attachment 50045 [details] [diff] [review] LDAP XPCOM SDK changes, v6 Fix license comment in XML that horked parsing of contents.rdf.

Comment on attachment 50048 [details] [diff] [review] LDAP XPCOM SDK changes, v7 Another run at fixing contents.rdf.

Comment on attachment 50055 [details] [diff] [review] mac buildsystem patch, v1 r=pavlov

These patches have been checked into the trunk.

probably insignificant, but with a current cvs build, linux, i got this during the first (but not second) startup of moz: XML Error in file 'jar:resource:///chrome/messenger.jar!/content/messenger/contents.rdf', Line Number: 6, Col Number: 1, Description: Source Line: <?xml version="1.0"?>

rkaa: I don't think that error is related to this bug; none of these patches touched that particular content.rdf.

Comment on attachment 50178 [details] [diff] [review] fix problem when invalid search filter specified, v1 Yulian found that the wrong error message was being displayed when an invalid search filter was specified. This turned out to be a combination of two small bugs, one in the LDAP XPCOM SDK, and one in the LDAP autocomplete session. This patch fixes both.

Comment on attachment 50178 [details] [diff] [review] fix problem when invalid search filter specified, v1 r=leif

The invalid search filter patch has now been checked into the trunk as well.

Adding correctness Status Whiteboard, correct/expected behavior does not occur.

Tested with 20010921 Linux trunk build. Error msgs generated for Invalid search filter syntax, invalid Base DN, invalid Hostname and port number, LDAP server not reachable.

Running 20010924 trunk builds, Works for Linux and MacOS 9.2 Not working for Wins 2k, NT and XP.

SR = mscott check it in to branch - PDT+

The windows problem is a packaging problem; non-installer (ie mozilla .zip builds) do work on windows.

Comment on attachment 50641 [details] [diff] [review] packaging changes, v1 sr=$haver

Packaging changes checked into the trunk.

I wanna sidetrack your thoughts for a second, this is the same kinda of stuff what should be apart of connecting to netscape webmail, or other mail servers. Because when open webmail - the first error alert pop: is an alert: failed to connect to server. (This is my most hated alert popup, comes up everytime you first try to open your inbox, even if it doesn't try to connect to the server, then it may try to connect again, (I believe a timeout?!? is in order to fix this one, no?) now this should not be a popup as it has not tried to get mail yet. The only indication is when you hit ok, the icons should change to failed to connect to server icon. (is that the correct thinking?) the second error popup: is a web browser alert (popup for ad2.doubleclick.com/ could not be found, I hate this popup just as much and it really sucks) - see www.shacknews.com, http://horoscopes.astrology.com/dailyaquarius.html -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The point here is this is really related to a much bigger problem/subject at hand: 1) I want to highlight the good discussion on error feedback here, and annoying vs useful feedback, not sure where else this discussion is taking place 2) I just think that you should be using such icons as well here for mail servers, if not already.. 3) to hopefully spawn some feedback into the rest of the mail client/browser vs annoying popups that take away focus on events and pausing such things as displaying mail inbox or finish rendering pages. - and you see how this relates to the focus change bug that everyone hates so much too. Below would really solve or go a long way to help the user experience for all of these problems: I though a "sidebar for errors" such as these or a "alert error console: just like the javascript console window:which when clicked on an alert/error the focus would then switch over to the corresponding window" for feedback like the post here: ------------------------------- ------- Additional Comments From Jean-Francois Ducarroz 2001-08-17 13:22 ------- from Myroslav Opyr <MyrOpyr@org.lviv.net> I have an idea: The item could be selectable and click on item with error message would show a transcript of LDAP communication. Details about error code and error message. Something like: ====================================== Error: [LDAP] Could not connect server OK Details >> Server: ldap.netscape.com Error code: ERRCODE Error Message: ERRMSG Transcript: blah-blah-blah ====================================== This cold become general error message for all Mozilla errors. I get error: "Cannot send mail" but finding out why takes me ages. It would be really easy to take a gasp on a transcript and find out that recepient domain was mistyped! -------------------------------------

Error msgs provided with 20010925 trunk builds on Windows XP and 2000.

Fix checked into the branch. There should be another iteration of this in future, probably with a floating window... but that's for another bug.

Verified with 20010926 branch builds on various platforms.