background-size:cover with background-origin: content-box causes missing images
Categories
(Core :: CSS Parsing and Computation, defect, P2)
Tracking
()
| Tracking | Status | |
|---|---|---|
| firefox-esr60 | --- | unaffected |
| firefox67 | --- | unaffected |
| firefox68 | + | verified |
| firefox69 | + | verified |
People
(Reporter: bugzilla.mozilla.org, Assigned: emilio)
References
(Regression)
Details
(Keywords: regression)
Attachments
(2 files)
|
779 bytes,
text/html
|
Details | |
|
47 bytes,
text/x-phabricator-request
|
ritu
:
approval-mozilla-beta+
|
Details | Review |
User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/68.0
Steps to reproduce:
- Update FF to 68.0beta4 (or maybe earlier) or nightly 69.0a1.
- Visit https://thecovr.de/iphone/classic
- The page displays images as background-image to a <div>. The there is no height present, only padding-bottom.
- Tested in Linux (Debian testing) and Windows 7.
Actual results:
The images on the bottom of the page (selectors .footer-image1 and .footer-image2) are missing. Their actual size is preserved as a white space.
background-size:cover and background-size:contain cause the bug; background-size:auto does not cause the white space, but (obviously) the images are not scaled.
Setting height:auto seems to fix the problem for Firefox 68.
Expected results:
The images should be displayed correctly without having to set height:auto, because it works in Firefox 67, Chrome 75 (+ IE Edge + Vivaldi), IE 11, Safari, Epiphany 3.32, and Konqueror 5.0.
|
Reporter | |
Comment 1•6 years ago
|
||
Added a minimal, complete, and verifiable example.
|
||
Comment 2•6 years ago
|
||
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:67.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/67.0
Hi,
I have managed to reproduce this issue on latest Beta version 68.0b11 and latest Nightly build 69.0a1 (2019-06-18) using Windows 10 and Ubuntu 18.
The issue is not reproducible on Release version 67.0.2
I will move this over to a component so developers can take a look over it. If is not the correct component please feel free to change it to an appropriate one.
This is a recent regression:
Last known good build: Build ID 20190503041749
First known bad build: Build ID 20190503215639
Pushlog:
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/pushloghtml?fromchange=bdf36faf780ba706bbebc8cbcd32ba892a899440&tochange=03166449953fbcaaf6c66d2c3b358319781a0e52
Maybe this bug can be related to this:
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1548349
Thanks for the report.
|
||
Comment 3•6 years ago
|
||
Bugbug thinks this bug is a regression, but please revert this change in case of error.
|
||
Comment 4•6 years ago
|
||
Can we narrow this down to a smaller regression window?
|
||
Comment 5•6 years ago
|
||
Regression window:
https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/autoland/pushloghtml?fromchange=020e530d49b3b177902dad1048c90d7d9b290354&tochange=451701e88d92935b77385235832865dabe8c2942
Regressed by: 451701e88d92935b77385235832865dabe8c2942 Emilio Cobos Álvarez — Bug 1547792 - AspectRatio should be a single ratio, not a size. r=dholbert
|
Assignee | |
Comment 7•6 years ago
|
||
Thanks, yeah.
[Tracking Requested - why for this release]: Recent regression that would be nice not to ship.
|
|
Assignee | |
Updated•6 years ago
|
|
||
Updated•6 years ago
|
|
|
Assignee | |
Comment 8•6 years ago
|
||
I filed https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/4049 on the spec not saying anything close to what implementations do.
|
|
Assignee | |
Updated•6 years ago
|
|
|
Assignee | |
Comment 9•6 years ago
|
||
This restores our previous behavior and adds a .tentative test because I
couldn't see how the spec makes any sense.
Filed https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/4049 about that.
|
||
Comment 10•6 years ago
|
||
We should consider uplifting this to beta68. Should be safe, since it's restoring previous behavior (after a change that wasn't intended to affect behavior inadvertently did have this small unintended effect).
|
||
Comment 11•6 years ago
|
||
|
|
||
Comment 12•6 years ago
|
||
|
||
Updated•6 years ago
|
|
|
Assignee | |
Comment 13•6 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 9073287 [details]
Bug 1559094 - Restore old behavior for background-size: cover + zero-sized background positioning area. r=dholbert
Beta/Release Uplift Approval Request
-
User impact if declined: Some backgrounds not showing up.
-
Is this code covered by automated tests?: Yes
-
Has the fix been verified in Nightly?: No
-
Needs manual test from QE?: Yes
-
If yes, steps to reproduce: Comment 0.
-
List of other uplifts needed: None
-
Risk to taking this patch: Low
-
Why is the change risky/not risky? (and alternatives if risky): We have pretty good test coverage for this area of the code, except for this edge-case, looks like, for which I've added WPT tests:
-
https://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/search?q=&case=true®exp=false&path=backgrounds%2F*%2F*cover*
-
https://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/search?q=&case=true®exp=false&path=backgrounds%2F*cover*
-
String changes made/needed: none
|
|
Assignee | |
Updated•6 years ago
|
|
|
Assignee | |
Comment 14•6 years ago
|
||
Thanks so much for the report and the test-case René!
|
|
||
Comment 15•6 years ago
|
||
|
|
||
Comment 16•6 years ago
|
||
| bugherder | ||
|
|
||
Comment 17•6 years ago
|
||
Verified - Fixed on latest Nightly 69.0a1 (2019-06-23) (64-bit) Build ID 20190623215020, on Windows 10 and Ubuntu 18.04.
Updating flag and waiting for fix on Beta.
Comment on attachment 9073287 [details]
Bug 1559094 - Restore old behavior for background-size: cover + zero-sized background positioning area. r=dholbert
Recent regression, verified in nightly, new automated tests, Beta68+
|
|
||
Comment 19•6 years ago
|
||
| bugherder uplift | ||
|
|
||
Comment 22•6 years ago
|
||
Verified - Fixed on latest Beta 68.0b13, Build ID 20190624133534, on Windows 10 and Ubuntu 18.04.
Description
•