1103341 - [Settings] Device Info -> Last Updated shows wrong date

Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 1061797

(Firefox OS Graveyard :: Gaia::Settings, defect)

Description

[Kevin Grandon :kgrandon]

Attachment: Screenshot of wrong date

I've updated my phone several times over OTA recently and the "Last Updated" field has been wrong for a long time.

Comment 1

[:gerard-majax]

That's a consequence of the date/time issues on Flame and similar platforms.

Comment 3

[Kevin Grandon :kgrandon]

I think this is a settings/update bug. I don't think this is a dupe of bug 1069863 since this doesn't display the *current* date/time, it displays whatever is in the setting. Reopening this, and will verify that I'm still seeing it.

Comment 4

[:gerard-majax]

(In reply to Kevin Grandon :kgrandon from comment #3)
> I think this is a settings/update bug. I don't think this is a dupe of bug
> 1069863 since this doesn't display the *current* date/time, it displays
> whatever is in the setting. Reopening this, and will verify that I'm still
> seeing it.

And since the date is wrong at the time the setting is being set ... it's a dupe.

Comment 5

[:gerard-majax]

http://dxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/b2g/components/UpdatePrompt.js#199

Comment 6

[Kevin Grandon :kgrandon]

The problem is that even after an OTA the date does not get updated. The system clock also has the correct date at the time of update.

Comment 7

[Kevin Grandon :kgrandon]

Perhaps this is something wrong with my profile though. I've since switched to a device which no longer has OTA updates, so I'm going to add qawanted to see if they are seeing this.

QA - after an OTA update, does the "last updated" screen in settings show the correct date?

Comment 8

[Brogan Zumwalt [Inactive]]

Attachment: Logcat

The "Last Updated" date is incorrect. Shows as 06/24/2014 immediately after OTA. Last updated date remains the same after device restart. Results are the same whether OTA-ing from 2.1 to 2.2 or 2.2 to 2.2

Attached Logcat taken from 2.1 to 2.2

OTA from Flame 2.1 (20141231001232) to Flame 2.2 (20150105010205)

OTA from Flame 2.2 (20141231010205) to latest Flame 2.2 (20150105010205)

Device: Flame 2.2 Master
BuildID: 20150105010205 (Shallow Flash)
Gaia: c2bf20d23851d5fda9f8f0ef0267db5f49152376
Gecko: 636498d041b5
Version: 37.0a1 (2.2 Master)
Firmware: V188-1
User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Mobile; rv:37.0) Gecko/37.0 Firefox/37.0

Comment 9

[Gabriele Svelto [:gsvelto]]

I think I know where the issue is and I agree with Alexandre that this is a dupe of bug 1069863 and in turn of bug 1061797.

(In reply to Kevin Grandon :kgrandon from comment #6)
> The problem is that even after an OTA the date does not get updated. The
> system clock also has the correct date at the time of update.

The issue is: not really. When booting the Flame the time is changed multiple times, so at the end of the boot sequence you might see the correct date but that doesn't mean that the code setting the preference also sees it. In fact that code is most likely to read the same date value at every boot which was set during the first full flash. See bug 1061797 comment 29 for the nitty gritty details. I recommend dup'ing against bug 1061797.

Comment 10

[Kevin Grandon :kgrandon]

I'm not seeing a 1970-ish date though. Let's do a depends on for now and see if it fixes this.

Comment 11

[:gerard-majax]

(In reply to Kevin Grandon :kgrandon from comment #10)
> I'm not seeing a 1970-ish date though. Let's do a depends on for now and see
> if it fixes this.

Given bug 1119727 and the createLock() reports, this is probably confirming we have a broken date like for this bug.

Comment 12

[Asa Dotzler [:asa]]

I'm seeing this on my Flame too.  Like Kevin, it's not a 1970s style date. My "Last Updated" says 08/07/2014 9:28 PM and I just got a nightly OTA a couple of days ago which is reported in "More Information" as "Build Identifier" 20150729030209. Is it possible one date is coming from the installation of the base image and the other date is coming from the Gecko/Gaia updates?

Comment 13

[:gerard-majax]

Gabriele already explained it well in comment 9.