So the failures all seem to be of this form: > TEST-UNEXPECTED-FAIL | layout/generic/test/test_bug632379.xhtml | Popup menu9 should open in the same place when the menu is scrolled - got -4, expected -20 I used rr to capture one such failure locally on linux (with slightly different got/expected values from what we're seeing on Windows, presumably just due to platform differences). I've submitted that failure to pernosco for further analysis and I'll post the link once I've got it. Having said that: this test is looking pretty unhealthy in general... For quite a while, it's been nerfed on mac (via [a platform-specific check in the test itself](https://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/rev/404408660a4d976e2ac25881cb1e1f2712f2d430/layout/generic/test/test_bug632379.xhtml#193) and skipped on linux and android (the android annotation is for the whole directory), as well as skipped on windows-in-test-verify-mode. So it's **only** enabled on Windows, and known to fail in test-verify mode there (and to also fail often intermittently in regular mode, per this bug here). So, worth eying the test itself with a lot of skepticism, perhaps.
Bug 1765788 Comment 37 Edit History
Note: The actual edited comment in the bug view page will always show the original commenter’s name and original timestamp.
So the failures all seem to be of this form: > TEST-UNEXPECTED-FAIL | layout/generic/test/test_bug632379.xhtml | Popup menu9 should open in the same place when the menu is scrolled - got -4, expected -20 I used rr to capture one such failure locally on linux (with slightly different got/expected values from what we're seeing on Windows, presumably just due to platform differences). I've submitted that failure to pernosco for further analysis and I'll post the link once I've got it. Having said that: this test is looking pretty unhealthy in general... For quite a while, it's been nerfed on mac (via [a platform-specific check in the test itself](https://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/rev/404408660a4d976e2ac25881cb1e1f2712f2d430/layout/generic/test/test_bug632379.xhtml#193)) and skipped on linux and android (the android annotation is for the whole directory), as well as skipped on windows-in-test-verify-mode, via [annotations in the manifest](https://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/rev/35af6b5a47797a840d0d84dbe5d321ec4949dc78/layout/generic/test/chrome.ini#2,16). So it's **only** enabled on Windows, and known to fail in test-verify mode there (and to also fail often intermittently in regular mode, per this bug here). So, worth eying the test itself with a lot of skepticism, perhaps.
So the failures all seem to be of this form: > TEST-UNEXPECTED-FAIL | layout/generic/test/test_bug632379.xhtml | Popup menu9 should open in the same place when the menu is scrolled - got -4, expected -20 I used rr to capture one such failure locally on linux (with slightly different got/expected values from what we're seeing on Windows, presumably just due to platform differences). I've submitted that failure to pernosco for further analysis and I'll post the link once I've got it. Having said that: this test is looking pretty unhealthy in general... For quite a while, it's been nerfed on mac (via [a platform-specific check in the test itself](https://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/rev/404408660a4d976e2ac25881cb1e1f2712f2d430/layout/generic/test/test_bug632379.xhtml#193)) and skipped on linux and android (the android annotation is for the whole directory), as well as skipped on windows-in-test-verify-mode, via [annotations in the manifest](https://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/rev/35af6b5a47797a840d0d84dbe5d321ec4949dc78/layout/generic/test/chrome.ini#2,16). So it's **only** enabled on Windows, though skipped in test-verify mode there (and known to fail often intermittently in regular mode, per this bug here). So, worth eying the test itself with a lot of skepticism, perhaps.
So the failures all seem to be of this form: > TEST-UNEXPECTED-FAIL | layout/generic/test/test_bug632379.xhtml | Popup menu9 should open in the same place when the menu is scrolled - got -4, expected -20 I used rr to capture one such failure locally on linux (with slightly different got/expected values from what we're seeing on Windows, presumably just due to platform differences). I've submitted that failure to pernosco for further analysis and I'll post the link once I've got it. Having said that: this test is looking pretty unhealthy in general... For quite a while, it's been nerfed on mac (via [a platform-specific check in the test itself](https://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/rev/404408660a4d976e2ac25881cb1e1f2712f2d430/layout/generic/test/test_bug632379.xhtml#193)) and skipped on linux and android (the android annotation is for the whole directory), as well as skipped on windows-in-test-verify-mode, via [annotations in the manifest](https://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/rev/35af6b5a47797a840d0d84dbe5d321ec4949dc78/layout/generic/test/chrome.ini#2,16). So it's **only** enabled on Windows, though skipped in test-verify mode there (and known to fail often, per this bug here). So, worth eying the test itself with a lot of skepticism, perhaps.