Closed Bug 1091437 Opened 11 years ago Closed 11 years ago

Intermittent browser_947914_button_cut.js | Cut button is disabled - | Selected text is removed from source when clicking on cut - Got cut text test, expected

Categories

(Firefox :: General, defect)

x86
Windows 8
defect
Not set
normal

Tracking

()

RESOLVED WORKSFORME

People

(Reporter: cbook, Unassigned)

References

()

Details

(Keywords: intermittent-failure)

Windows 8 64-bit mozilla-inbound pgo test mochitest-e10s-browser-chrome-1 https://treeherder.mozilla.org/ui/logviewer.html#?job_id=3419121&repo=mozilla-inbound 19:12:56 INFO - 589 INFO TEST-UNEXPECTED-FAIL | chrome://mochitests/content/browser/browser/components/customizableui/test/browser_947914_button_cut.js | Cut button is disabled -
Gijs: Do you know what could have caused this, seems its mostly Win8
Flags: needinfo?(gijskruitbosch+bugs)
Summary: Intermittent browser_947914_button_cut.js | Cut button is disabled - → Intermittent browser_947914_button_cut.js | Cut button is disabled - | Selected text is removed from source when clicking on cut - Got cut text test, expected
Not offhand did this start on inbound? That's what it looks like...
Flags: needinfo?(gijskruitbosch+bugs) → needinfo?(cbook)
yeah at least i noticed this there first, but there are other failures like https://treeherder.mozilla.org/ui/logviewer.html#?job_id=1041686&repo=fx-team Gijs: since this are all mochitest-e10s-browser failures could this realted to like https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/caa95b342316 that landed yesterday ?
Flags: needinfo?(cbook) → needinfo?(gijskruitbosch+bugs)
(In reply to Carsten Book [:Tomcat] from comment #7) > yeah at least i noticed this there first, but there are other failures like > https://treeherder.mozilla.org/ui/logviewer.html#?job_id=1041686&repo=fx- > team > > Gijs: since this are all mochitest-e10s-browser failures could this realted > to like https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/caa95b342316 that landed > yesterday ? I mean, without that change these tests didn't run at all, so for sure backing that out (or disabling this test in e10s mode) will "fix" the issue. I'm just still really confused about the sequence of events here. See also bug 1091135 that Ryan filed. The following things happened: - I landed the e10s enabling (the cset above) - ??? (A) - the e10s enabling got merged - ??? (B) - bug 1089591 landed - there were failures - bug 1089591 got backed out - ??? (C) In order to figure out what's going on here, it'd be really useful to know if there were any failures at points A, B, or C. I'm guessing the ones in this bug fall under C? Were there any instances of A or B? What I'm trying to get at is, is it reasonable to suspect that this has been failing ever since being e10s-enabled (again, cset above) and were we just (un)lucky to not notice that before it got merged, or has this been failing since some later point, just relatively shortly afterwards, either connected with bug 1089591 or with something else, and if so, at what point and in what tree did it start failing?
Flags: needinfo?(ryanvm)
Flags: needinfo?(gijskruitbosch+bugs)
Flags: needinfo?(cbook)
Depends on: 1091561
Disabled together with _paste in remote: https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/fx-team/rev/7193660c44a2 per discussion with Tomcat on IRC.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 11 years ago
No longer depends on: 1091561
Flags: needinfo?(ryanvm)
Flags: needinfo?(cbook)
Resolution: --- → WORKSFORME
Blocks: 1091561
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.