Closed
Bug 210664
Opened 21 years ago
Closed 20 years ago
unblocked popup-window does not appear on reload
Categories
(SeaMonkey :: UI Design, defect)
SeaMonkey
UI Design
Tracking
(Not tracked)
RESOLVED
INVALID
People
(Reporter: blindmull, Unassigned)
References
()
Details
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Build Identifier: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 opening http://www.nytimes.com (denying cockies) a popup window was blocked by the browser by my defaults. adding the site to my exceptions list and reloading the page did NOT result in the popup appearing. Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1.go to http://www.nytimes.com (with blocked popups) 2.deny cookies 3. ad the site to the exceptions list 4. reload Actual Results: no popup Expected Results: allow popup
I can confirm this bug on build Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.5a) Gecko/20030708 The bug also appears on the site http://opac.tu-berlin.de Reproduce as follows: go to http://opac.tu-berlin.de, enter some garbage ("asdfasdf") into the query form, press enter. Unblocking the popup does not work. Reason: The popup is from a different site than the window opening it. Either the suggestions "opac.tu-berlin.de" and "nytimes.com" are wrong or the algorithm determining admissibility uses the wrong address: The suggestions are the hosts of the pages calling window.open, the algorithm checking permissions compares them to the hosts of the pages displayed in the popup, "libspro.tu-berlin.de" and "ad.doubleclick.net", which obviously do not match. Workaround: Find out the actual host of the page in the popup, in the testcases libspro.tu-berlin.de and ad.doubleclick.net and add these to the whitelist. Fix: Suggest the same host to be added to the whitelist that the algorithm checking popup-permissions uses.
Comment 2•20 years ago
|
||
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:1.7) Gecko/20040514 I have observed that in other sites. I just wanted to file a bug on this. This is a total loss of function (major). Since this makes popups which were blocked once are practically unreachable for the average user, this must not happen for a mojor release like 1.7. It should also not be in 1.8. Asking for blocking. Yes, I know this is late. pi
Assignee: general → guifeatures
Severity: normal → major
Status: UNCONFIRMED → NEW
Component: Browser-General → XP Apps: GUI Features
Ever confirmed: true
Flags: blocking1.8a2?
Flags: blocking1.7?
OS: MacOS X → All
QA Contact: general
Hardware: Macintosh → All
Updated•20 years ago
|
Flags: blocking1.7? → blocking1.7-
Comment 3•20 years ago
|
||
Actially, this is dataloss, hence critical. And it used to work, hence a regression. pi
Severity: major → critical
Keywords: dataloss,
regression
nytimes.com sends slightly different advertising content every time you load it (well, not *every* time because their set of advertising content is finite). Sometimes the page includes an invisible image that tries to open a popup window in its load handler. Sometimes it doesn't. You're likely to get the version that tries to open a popup window on your first visit after some fairly lengthy time delay, but after that you're very unlikely to get that version of the page, even if you stand there and reload a dozen times. They probably track your IP number. Mozilla doesn't offer to open a popup on the second load of nytimes.com because the site doesn't try to open another popup. Kind of nice of them, in a not particularly nice way.
Comment 5•20 years ago
|
||
I had the same problem with any other page where I unblocked. This is why I found this bug. pi
The bug as described in the initial comment is INVALID. Do NOT reopen this bug. Find a bug of your own if you have some other complaint, and be specific.
Status: REOPENED → RESOLVED
Closed: 20 years ago → 20 years ago
Resolution: --- → INVALID
Wait. This happens to you at /any/ site? That'd be a pretty big bug. Be sure you've tried it without extensions and give a build date, before you file that new bug, 'coz that ain't happening in my recent trunk build, or in a copy of the Firefox Aviary build from two days ago I happen to have lying around.
Comment 8•20 years ago
|
||
That was any I tried to unblock. I do it very rarely, so I don't have examples at hand. The last I had was not publicly available. After typing in many long forms it would output an important result page this way. It failed and unblocking did not help to get the page. Even after switching pop-up blocking off completely, it took many attempts to get it. This was on Linux with a 1.7 branch build. Now I tried to find test pages and could not get it to work. pi
Comment 9•20 years ago
|
||
The last sentence meant: I could not see the bug. pi
Comment 10•20 years ago
|
||
I harshed on you unnecessarily; I apologize for that. If you can find a publicly available site of course feel free to write up a bug. However in my experience with this stuff, which is somewhat considerable, this tiny bit of the code has never been broken.
Comment 11•20 years ago
|
||
Instead of a new bug I reopen this which exactly descriebes it. I use Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:1.7) Gecko/20040609. The page in questions is: http://www.aqua-nova.at/html/seite1.htm. When I visit the page, I get the icon for a blocked pop-up. I click and add the site (which is identified as aqua-nova.at). Then I reload (even force reload) the page. I again get the icon. When I click on it, I see that aqua-nova.at is indeed listed as an allowed site. pi
Comment 12•20 years ago
|
||
And the next example: http://www.ris.bka.gv.at/auswahl/ (again the www. is dropped) pi
Comment 13•20 years ago
|
||
Comment 0 remains reproducible yet invalid. Comment 11 WFM, tested with Firefox 20040614-11 (trunk) and 20040614-23 (0.9 branch), as well as Mozilla 20040614-10 (trunk) builds. I also tried the URL from comment 12 using some build or another. All not reproducible. Boris, your results will turn out to be a bug in one of your extensions. I'd be curious to know which one, just for future reference. And while I do care about bugs in extensions because they're perceived as bugs in the browser, this ain't the place to report them. I'm closing this bug invalid once again.
Status: REOPENED → RESOLVED
Closed: 20 years ago → 20 years ago
Resolution: --- → INVALID
Comment 14•20 years ago
|
||
I don't use any extension. Those problems appear in different installations on different systems (Windows and Linux). So it cannot even be a profile thing. pi
Comment 15•20 years ago
|
||
No extensions? Curses, I underestimated you once again. The problem you're seeing, is it readily reproduced on the installations on which it does happen? Does a new profile help on those systems? (It's a settings bug that has cropped up on more than one of your systems, perhaps?) Does it matter if you launch Mozilla with the site already allowed, or is it necessary to add the site after getting the popup-blocked indication? Does it ever happen more than once in a row? Does it perhaps depend on some login cookie that treats you to a different popup? I've never seen a bug like this that couldn't be explained by some other bug or some condition. Maybe you're sitting on the first one. But you're not the first to try. You know if you opened a new bug and mentioned in the initial comment that the bug's appearance was not guaranteed, I wouldn't be tempted to close that one so readily. Nor could I fix it. But at least it'd be open, collecting dust. And in any case, bugs for which the first dozen comments are not applicable, even if the summary string seems to match, are only confusing.
Comment 16•20 years ago
|
||
>The problem you're seeing, is it readily reproduced on the installations on >which it does happen? Yes. >Does a new profile help on those systems? Also yes. >(It's a settings >bug that has cropped up on more than one of your systems, perhaps?) Could be, let's see what my user.js does, which is the same everywhere (I removed things obviously unrelated): // // B R O W S E R // // JavaScript annoyances (which don't have a UI) off user_pref("dom.disable_window_open_feature.close", true); user_pref("dom.disable_window_open_feature.directories", false); user_pref("dom.disable_window_open_feature.location", true); user_pref("dom.disable_window_open_feature.menubar", true); user_pref("dom.disable_window_open_feature.minimizable", true); user_pref("dom.disable_window_open_feature.personalbar", true); user_pref("dom.disable_window_open_feature.resizable", true); user_pref("dom.disable_window_open_feature.scrollbars", true); user_pref("dom.disable_window_open_feature.titlebar", true); user_pref("dom.disable_window_open_feature.toolbar", true); user_pref("dom.event.contextmenu.enabled", false); // When the dom.disable_open_click_delay pref is set to a non-zero // number, window.open will fail when called more than that number of // milliseconds after a mouse click. user_pref("dom.disable_open_click_delay", 1000); >Does it >matter if you launch Mozilla with the site already allowed, or is it necessary >to add the site after getting the popup-blocked indication? Now that is a surprise: Yes, if I launch the browser with the site already added, the pop-up shows up. >Does it ever happen more than once in a row? What exactly do you mean here? >Does it perhaps depend on some login cookie that treats >you to a different popup? There is no login in both cases I listed. pi
Comment 17•20 years ago
|
||
It's gotta be >user_pref("dom.disable_open_click_delay", 1000); (see bug 247017) >Now that is a surprise: Yes, if I launch the browser with the site already >added, the pop-up shows up. I wasn't expecting that either. Note this is the thing I was sceptical about, that it would make a difference whether you approached the site already whitelisted. And indeed it doesn't seem to affect bug 247017. >>Does it ever happen more than once in a row? >What exactly do you mean here? Basically I was asking the same question with a slight twist; with the site whitelisted and the first attempt blocked, whether the window would successfully open by simply trying a second time. If the problem you're seeing is caused by the click_delay pref, by all means let's move over to the bug report made for that problem.
Updated•20 years ago
|
Flags: blocking1.8a2?
Updated•20 years ago
|
Product: Core → Mozilla Application Suite
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•