Closed Bug 162025 Opened 22 years ago Closed 22 years ago

UNC Based Profiles don't work


(Core :: XPCOM, defect, P2)

Windows 2000





(Reporter: mdhorton, Assigned: darin.moz)



(Keywords: helpwanted, relnote)


(1 file, 4 obsolete files)

I am using win2K pro on a linux samba domain. Every time I reboot my computer 
and start Mozilla I get the Mozilla Profile Manager and it asks me to select a 
profile. There is always a default profile which is the profile I was using 
before the reboot but when I select it and click start Mozilla I get an error 
saying "Mozilla cannot use the profile "default" because the directory 
containing the profile cannot be found. Please choose another profile or create 
a new one." So I create a new one and reboot and I get the same thing except 
this time it now has two profiles listed and both of them give me this error, 
so I create a new one and so on in a loop. I have deleted all profiles and 
started new and it still doesn't remember where my profile is from the last 
windows session. I am getting very frustrated with this and I cannot book mark 
any links as they will not be there after a reboot. Please Help.
   Reporter: could you please  read  the  Bug  Writing  Guidelines  at to see  the
kinds of information we need in a bug report. Please report back  with
more information (like BuildID and steps to reproduce)  after  reading
those guidelines and consider using  the  Bugzilla  Helper  to  report
future bugs.

   The Helper can be found at
   Thanks for your help in testing Mozilla.

Also, are you using quicklaunch feature?
I am using build 2002072104. I have been having this problem since version 1. I
have not tried to reproduce this on other machines as I only have a small
network. I am using quick launch. This computer is a Linux Samba domain member
and as such the user profile is stored on the server, which seems to be a
problem for Mozilla. After a reboot it doesn't know where the profile is. I have
another computer which is not a domain member and it works just fine. This seems
related to the fact this computers profile is copied back to the server each
time it is rebooted. 
Please try disabling quicklaunch. As mentioned in Release Notes

>  * Use of Mozilla's "quicklaunch" (AKA "turbo") mode may cause the deletion
> of user preferences. It is recommended that you do not run quicklaunch
> until this bug is fixed. (Bug 155080)

This may be related to your problem. Also, please read bug 97045 and see if
it describes your problem or not.
I am not using Quick Launch. I read some of these other bug reports and the
profile I am creating is not being deleted. Mozilla just forgets where it is. If
I create a new profile after a reboot and then copy the contents of the original
profile I get all my settings back. But on the next reboot it loses it again. I
have searched through the win2K registry and I cannot find where Mozilla is
keeping this info. Can you tell me where Mozilla saves the info in the registry?
Or does it save this info some where else?
Mozilla keeps its data in %USERDATA%\Application Data\Mozilla,
%USERDATA% usually being c:\documents and settings\%USERNAME%.

Could verify if that durectory withits subtree is properly copied back and forth
when you reboot?
IT is keeping the profile there, and it is being copied, however on a reboot
Mozilla says the profile isn't there. Even though I can find it on the drive,
Mozilla says the directory containing the profile cannot be found. It's like
Mozilla forgets where it stored the profile between boots (actually I don't even
have to reboot, all I did do is logoff). 
That is really weird, and I cannot find anything like that back in the database.
I'm putting a helpwanted keyword on this, and hope somebody with Mozilla set up
in a way similear to yours will confirm it.

severity --> major.
Severity: normal → major
Keywords: helpwanted
I would like to ask some questions similar to one already posted, it might help
me to give you some further info. Mozilla knows where the profile is stored
until I reboot. So, where does Mozilla keep this info? Is it in the system
registry? If so, I haven't found it. I have only found references to where the
executable is and nothing else. Also, if I delete the profile, and then restart
Mozilla, it says it found a Netscape profile, would I like to convert it. If it
knows where the Netscape profile is, why doesn't it know where it's own profile
is? Oh well any help on this will be appreciated. I really am trying to get away
from IE and I have come up with a temporary workaround as already posted, so I
guess I can live with this for now. By the way this didn't seem to start until I
upgraded to version 1, if that's any help.
Mozilla doesn't store much information in Windows registry; it uses it's own
"registry.dat" located in the %AppData%\Mozilla directory.

Hmm, maybe that's the problem. 

1) Log in with your network username
2) Open Regedit and go to HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Windows\Shell Folders
3) Write down the value of "AppData" string value
4) Go to the directory mentioned in AppData
5) Verify that directory named "Mozilla" exists there and it contains
"registry.dat" file.
All I have there is HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion,
and HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Windows\ShellNoRoam. I don't have a key
by the name HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Windows\Shell Folders. Under the
HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion key I have a key
called SHELL EXTENSIONS but no value APPDATA. This is probably why Mozilla
doesn't remember after a reboot, it can't find the path cause none is being
saved. I had tried to uninstall Mozilla and re-install it earlier today, but it
made no difference. If you can tell me the exact string wording, I can create
this key and see if that fixes it.
One more thing. There is a "registry.dat" file in C:\Documents and
Settings\%username%\Application Data\Mozilla. It was last written to 08/11/02
7:40PM. So it is being used by Mozilla.
It sounds like you're an expierenced person and can do some advanced checks. 
I would suggest going to and downloading the program called
"file monitor". Then, launch iy, launch Mozilla, save Filemon's log to a file
right after Mozilla claims it can't find a profile, and attach it to this bug.
Then, we'll see exactly where Mozilla tries to look for a profile and that might
give us a clue why it doesn't find it...
Sorry it has taken me so long to get back to you. I forgot to save the output
from filemon, but I was able to figure out what is happening. This may be only
related to my machine, however I bet it could be duplicated.

The problem seems to be a missunderstanding of how win2k handles profiles. Win2k
setup allows you to join a domain during the install process, which does save
some time. However, when this profile is setup it's path is C:\Documents and
Settings\username.domainname. Win2k never creates a profile for C:\Documents and
Settings\username. So, you would think it would be a simple matter to just
create the user "someuser", but when you create this user win2k makes it
C:\Documents and Settings\username.machinename. Here lies the problem. Mozilla
is looking for the profile in C:\Documents and Settings\username, which does not

I tried to change the profile path in the registry.dat file located in
C:\Documents and Settings\username\Mozilla, but it is changed back everytime you
restart Mozilla. I have, I think, fixed my problem by creating a directory
C:\Documents and Settings\username. This seems to keep the profile in tact
between reboots, but I am doing more testing. This fix might also fix some of
the other bugs with similar problems. 

I think this is some problem with the way Mozilla gets it's info on where the
profile is during the install. I wish I knew more about the MS win2k profile
thing to be of more help to you. If there is anymore testing you would like for
me to do, let me know. For now I am fixed, thank god, it was really getting to
be a hassle to have to start all over with Mozilla after each reboot. I really
like this software, IT'S GREAT. Thanks.
Mike, we really appreciate your efforts on figuring the case of the problem.
It will be so much easier for the development team to fix this bug now when you
performed such an extensive investigation. Good job, and thank you for your
help on making Mozilla the best browser ever!

==> Changing Component to Profile Manager BackEnd
Component: Profile Manager FrontEnd → Profile Manager BackEnd
Ever confirmed: true
Whiteboard: Need people with w2K on a Samba domain to reproduce the bug
reassign to component owner
Assignee: ben → ccarlen
*** Bug 100395 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 178267 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
anyone want to dupe bug 101953 and bug 110832 as well?  i think they all talk
about the same thing.

also, any chance in nominating for 1.2? this prevents mozilla from entering the
enterprise space.
Depends on: 101953
*** Bug 110832 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Re comment 18: bug 101953 is a meta bug and therefore not a duplicate, rather
this bug depends on bug 101953. I also doubt that this will be fixed in 1.2, no
patches are available.
*** Bug 178416 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

We've also been seeing the same problem as Mike intermittently for some users on
our local Win2k domain.

I've tried to verify that the fault is caused by Mozilla assuming that the name
of the name of the local profile store (ie as defined in %USERDATA%) is the same
as the logged-in user's username (ie as defined in %USERNAME%).

To force the local profile store to have a different name, two new folders were
created as domain administrator of the form <username> and <username>.<domain>
and all access rights to those directories were removed.  Then the test user
logged in.

Unfortunately, whilst Windows chose a different name for the profile store
Mozilla was still able to create a new profile as normal; moreover once closed
Mozilla was able to locate the profile that it had previously stored.

Looking at the code in xpcom/io/nsSpecialSystemDirectory.cpp, Mozilla seems to
be doing the right thing by asking the relevant MS API (see <a
for the location of the user's profile directory rather than using a heuristic
to determine it for itself.

So, I don't know what's causing this problem and would like to get it fixed.  If
anyone can suggest some pertinent tests I can try them out locally.

We're using the stock 1.0 Mozilla win32 release and aren't using QuickLaunch. 
We're using a set of Win2k domain controllers with Samba+Linux boxes providing
homedirectory access (mapped as H:\).
As Torben suggest on bug 110832 I am attaching my patch from that bug here.
Note that this patch is about a year old and is incomplete so is probably most
useful only at a starting point.

This is just a partial fix. Komodo (an app built on Mozilla-the-framework),
for now, took the route of working around
this problem by falling back to CSIDL_LOCAL_APPDATA on Windows if CSIDL_APPDATA

was a UNC path (the presumption being that CSIDL_LOCAL_APPDATA directory is
*not* a UNC path <fingers-crossed>). Here is that Mozilla patch that Komodo is
using for that:
and the related Komodo bug:
another possible dupe, bug 79419 . . .
*** Bug 79419 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 180926 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 181086 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
This bug is blocked by bug 101953 and I'm not sure that's appropriate. I think
we are looking at two different unrelated problems here and I'll hopefully prove
my theory.

First, let me digress. I manage a windows domain environment of 2000 machines
with 8000 roaming users (a college with loads of students). Roaming profiles are
used. We rolled out Mozilla in the fall and have had horrible problems based on
the mozilla profile issue (and the lack of spell checker, but that's a different
bug :).

Problem #1 (which is bug 101953 and is blocking this bug): Mozilla can't handle
UNC pathnames anywhere apparently. If a system administrator assigns a GPO
(group policy object) redirecting the application data (%appdata%) to a UNC,
Mozilla won't work. It can't find the profile directory. (related comments on
this are in bug 110832, which was marked a dupe of this bug recently).

Problem #2: Profile locations are stored in registry.dat as absolute paths, like
c:\windows\profiles\user\application data\mozilla\... etc. As stated in comment
#22, Mozilla at first does the right thing and locates registry.dat by finding
appdata by basically expanding %appdata%. The problem is, after that, the paths
within that registry.dat file are used. This is a problem because the path that
%appdata% points to can change in Windows NT/2000/XP.  

For instance, if a user does not logout and the machine is reset, the profile
server is rebooted during logout, power failure, some corruption is evident, the
moon is full, or a 12-sided die lands on a certain number, then on the next
logon, Windows will copy the roaming profile to a new profile directory on
%systemdrive%.  In our environment, we get a sequence of user, user.domain,
user.domain.000, user.domain.001, etc... So the profile with a registry.dat file
pointing to a different place is copied into the current %appdata% during logon,
and mozilla gets confused and throws up the profile manager when started. If you
click the one profile listed, it can't find it, because %appdata% has changed
since registry.dat was initially created in the user's profile and hence moz
can't find the profile data.

So, because of this, I believe these two bugs are unrelated and can be squashed
independently. At least that's my theory! :)
Flags: blocking1.3a?
Flags: blocking1.3a? → blocking1.3a-
correcting relationship
bug 101953 is a meta bug, and as I understand it, exists because there are two
generations of file i/o libraries, one of which does not do UNC's correctly, the
other of which does. File URL's work fine w/ UNC's, so I know that this does
work for some areas in mozilla.

Based on these problem descriptions, I think we can set this up and reproduce it
internally, given some time, if that is what is needed next to fix this bug.
Blocks: 101953
No longer depends on: 101953
No longer blocks: 101953
Depends on: 101953
QA Contact: ktrina → gbush
I had this one bite me in the *ss yesterday, though with a slightly  different
effect. I took me a day to trace it back to this bug and  figure out a
workaround. Here's my situation:

Fresh install of WinXP Pro SP1. I installed the latest moz nightly  (20030129, I
think). Fire it up and it wants me to create a profile.  Clicking "Finish" to
create the profile does nothing. Looking closer, I  realized that I couldn't see
anything displayed where I expected the  "your profile will be created here"
message to be. Clicking "Choose  Folder" didn't do anything either (no dialog).

At this point, I start to panic, thinking that I'll be forced to use IE  from
now on. 
Here's how I worked around it:
1) Find out where %APPDATA% goes (see comment 9)
2) Create "Mozilla\Profiles" folder under %APPDATA%
3) Create "Mozilla\Profiles" folder under
   C:\Documents and Settings\<user>\Application Data
4) Install Mozilla 1.3a
5) Start Profile Manager -> Create ... Choose Folder and select
   C:\Documents and Settings\<user>\Application Data\Mozilla\Profiles

The install of 1.3a was because "Choose Folder" didn't work in the  nightly I
had, but did in 1.3a. 

I realize this probably isn't the place, but I have a couple of other
observations coming out of this:
1) If %APPDATA%\Mozilla\Profiles doesn't exist, the Create Profile 
   dialog doesn't display the message telling you where the new profile 
   will be stored.
2) Moz should spit out some error messages when something goes wrong. A 
   text label didn't display, two buttons did nothing, and the UI acted 
   as if everything was normal. I even tried launching with the -console
   option to see if anything showed up on STDERR (nothing did). Without 
   some determination and luck, I would have never figured out what was
   going wrong.
i can't believe we have a patch for the unc problem burried over here...
Assignee: ccarlen → trentm
Component: Profile Manager BackEnd → XPCOM
Summary: Profile problem in Win2K → UNC Based Profiles don't work
Comment on attachment 105344 [details] [diff] [review]
proposed partial fix to allow UNC paths

dougt/darin: please look at this.

the only change i'd make is:
>+    if (*(slash+1) == '\\') {
>+        slash += 2;
>+        slash = _mbschr(slash, '\\');
>+        slash += 1;
>+    } else {
>+        slash += 1;
>+    }
>     slash = _mbschr(slash, '\\');
    if (*(slash+1) == '\\') {
	slash += 2;
	slash = _mbschr(slash, '\\');
    slash = _mbschr(slash + 1, '\\');
Attachment #105344 - Flags: superreview?(darin)
Attachment #105344 - Flags: review?(dougt)
Comment on attachment 105344 [details] [diff] [review]
proposed partial fix to allow UNC paths

>Index: nsLocalFileWin.cpp

>     unsigned char* slash = _mbschr((const unsigned char*) mResolvedPath.get(), '\\');
>+    if (*(slash+1) == '\\') {
>+        slash += 2;
>+        slash = _mbschr(slash, '\\');
>+        slash += 1;
>+    } else {
>+        slash += 1;
>+    }

couple comments:

1- your patch doesn't apply cleanly.  (conflicts with version 1.70 from Jan

2- make sure you null check the return value of _mbschr (which the current code

3- increment |slash| in only one place... i.e.:

  unsigned char* slash = _mbschr((const unsigned char*) mResolvedPath.get(),
  // XXX null check return value!
  if (slash[1] == '\\') {
      slash = _mbschr(slash + 2, '\\');
      // XXX null check return value!
Attachment #105344 - Flags: superreview?(darin)
Attachment #105344 - Flags: superreview-
Attachment #105344 - Flags: review?(dougt)
is this fixable for 1.3?
Flags: blocking1.3?
Keywords: mozilla1.2
Flags: blocking1.3? → blocking1.3-
I just saw that asa denied to fix the UNC problem for 1.3. I wonder if anybody
at is aware that this very bug prevents every place with decent (meaning
centralized profiles without local copy) from using mozilla at all ? Mozilla
just does not start. This is realy sad and is denying mozilla a whole segement
of the market. What is ironic, is that it is probably exactly the places which
would be most friendly to mozilla as they have people who are realy into big
networks, otherwhise they would not pick that particular methode of constructing
a windows setup. A further problem with this bug is that mozilla just dies from
it without generating any errors what so ever, so most people will not figure
that it is this very bug which is responsible and will thus just conclude that
moz is broken. 
This bug has now been unsolved for a whooping 6 months or so... it is 
incredible that noone has been able to resolve this one by now. Just the fact 
that it was denied fixing for 1.3 shows that depending on volunteers for 
software simply does not work all the way. Well Mozilla is out of reach for my 
800 potential users, they are then instead becoming happy MSIE and Opera users. 
Sad, because Mozilla is a pretty decent browser...
Blocks: 101953
No longer depends on: 101953
i spoke to trent about this bug.  he's not planning to work on this anytime soon.  

-> suresh
Assignee: trentm → suresh
Priority: -- → P2
Target Milestone: --- → mozilla1.4alpha
Is this still qawanted?
I have to chime in to agree with comments 36 and 37. This bug heavily discourages Mozilla use in Windows domain environments with redirected user profiles... which is probably most Windows shops. It *is* possible to work around it, if you have access to a cooperative domain administrator and are willing to add logon scripts and change domain policies just to support Mozilla. However, the nature of the workaround needed is not at all obvious. The Windows profile redirection to a UNC path is invisible to the user, Mozilla's failure mode gives NO ERROR MESSAGE AT ALL, and the release notes (IIRC) don't say anything about these symptoms. This all makes the problem awfully hard to diagnose and fix. If y'all don't document the problem and symptoms in the release notes, and point the user to some documentation for a workaround, Mozilla's penetration into the Windows domain market is gonna be very slow indeed. At the very least, Mozilla needs to throw an informative error message when it chokes on a UNC profile path. Don't let this slip beyond 1.4!
To cut to the important things (i.e. money), what does Netscape 7.02 do in this
regard? I'm going to assume it doesn't understand UNC pathnames either, so one
must ask what AOL-TimeWarner want to do with Netscape in the corporate Windows
This should have a release note for 1.3 final. Could someone please submit
proposed text for one? TIA.
Keywords: relnote
Suggested release not text:

Known Problems:
Windows: UNC paths are not fully supported. In a domain environment with redirected Windows user profiles, this can lead to Mozilla failing to create or recognize a Mozilla profile, causing Mozilla to end immediately after launch. If this occurs, change the domain policy to no longer redirect the "Application Data" folder. 
Re the suggested release text, also note comment #28, part 2, that just unredirecting (nice word) the appdata folder is not enough. Problems will still occur because windows often changes the path to the windows profile itself on the local machine. A workaround for this I later found was to ensure the mozilla profile is stored in a fixed location, like user home dir that has been assigned a drive letter. That way everything but registry.dat is moved out of the roaming profile. This can be automated via a cmd likemozilla -CreateProfile "default z:\mozilla"Note the double quotes are critical.  Getting the mozilla profile out of the roaming profile is also important for logon/logout times since all the changed **** in roaming profiles is copied down/up during logon/logout and if user has large cache dir, it's a real time killer.After our dropping appdata back to unredirected on our domain's GPO and moving all user moz profiles to z:\mozilla, our mozilla problems have finally stopped. But let me tell you it's been a lot of work and I took a big reputation beating for deciding to deploy mozilla in my enterprise of 2000 desktops. I am a big moz fan and I now regret my initial decision. I can't imagine more than a handful of enterprise domain admins, if that, sticking it out and putting the work in to make mozilla work in an enterprise.  btw, Asa must be busy as hell, and I'm sure can't have time to read all comments. The status whiteboard of this bug is very misleading, as well as first few comments. It implies this bug only affects w2k users on samba domains, which is probably a very small set of situations. Would changing the whiteboard help? 
Perhaps it would help if we had a new clean building version of the patch?
Thank you for the informative post.

If you don't like the proposed relnote, how about this one?

Relnote: Support for profiles referenced by UNC paths is not implemented. For
workarounds, see bug 162025.
Whiteboard: Need people with w2K on a Samba domain to reproduce the bug
Flags: blocking1.4a?
Keywords: mozilla1.3
Attached patch updated patch (obsolete) — Splinter Review
the important part is: @@ -642,11 +630,11 @@
Attachment #105344 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #116142 - Flags: superreview?(darin)
Attachment #116142 - Flags: review?(suresh)
Attachment #116142 - Flags: review?(suresh) → review?(dougt)
Comment on attachment 116142 [details] [diff] [review]
updated patch

i don't like the idea of redefining strrchr.  how about just create a new
method my_strrchhr and map that to _mbstrchr on windows or XP and for the other
platforms just call strrchr.  (what I really don't understand is why can we
call strrchr on everything but windows and os2).

I would argue against landing the nsFileSpec changes.  It is dead.  continuely
fixing it does not give anyone any reason to migrate.

Do you have any test cases I can run?

Please don't land this until after i land my minimo branch.  I will be moving
nsFileSpec into a different directory.
I can answer you strrchr question.

As you know, on OS/2 and Windows, backslash is the path delimeter.

Unfortunately, backslash is not in the control character section, it is at
position 5C. Because of this it can be the second byte of a double byte character.

C:\name\naA\me where
      These represent one character

and if you used strrchr, you would get the wrong backslash.

There is an easy workaround to this on OS/2 and windows (WinPrevChar and
PrevChar) which is why we had to implement our own mbsrchr in nsLocalFileOS2
(and Win).

I haven't read this bug completely to see what the issues are, but I ran across
doug's comment and thought I would mention this.
->timeless, as he has the patch :)
Assignee: suresh → timeless
dougt, is mkaply's response sufficient? 
Flags: blocking1.4a? → blocking1.4a-
Comment on attachment 116142 [details] [diff] [review]
updated patch

>+#if defined(XP_WIN) || defined(XP_OS2)
>+#define strrchr(xstring, xcharacter) (char*) _mbsrchr((const unsigned char *) xstring, xcharacter)

Perhaps it would be better to define a new macro that's called neither
|strrchr| nor |_mbsrchr|?  I could imagine this causing problems if strrchr is
already a macro, or in case somebody really wants strrchr elsewhere in the file
at some point in the future.

>Index: mozilla/xpcom/io/nsFileSpecWin.cpp
> 	src = (char*)ioPath;
>+    // Convert '/' to '\'. (Must check EVERY character: consider UNC path
>+    // case.)
>+    while (*src)
>+    {
>+        if (*src == '/')
>+            *src = '\\';
>+        ++src;

May I suggest:

for (src = (char*)ioPath; *src; ++src)
    if (*src == '/')
	*src = '\\';


How have you tested UNC-based profiles to see that they work with this patch?

Also, could you attach a new patch against the trunk (since files have moved)? 
It would be good to get this in for 1.4beta.
forget macro'ing strrchr... all usages are to locate the last path segment. 
just add a function like this:

  const char *GetLastPathSegment(const char *path, const char separator)
#if defined(XP_PC)
    return _mbsrchr(path, separator);
    return strrchr(path, separator);

why in the world is |separator| a parameter... oh well, this is dead code
anyways :-/
Flags: blocking1.4?
adt: nsbeta1-
Keywords: nsbeta1nsbeta1-

It seems to me, that the cause of the bug is well researched, documented and
there is even a patch, yet fixing gets pushed out further and further ... this
is realy annoying to me ... we have hundreds of people here at our site who
would love to use mozilla and keep requesting it's deployment, yet we can't
because of moz's inability to handle UNC paths. I assume manywell managed
Windows setups at large sites keep their user profiles on the server behind a
UNC path witout copiing them to the local drive on every logon ... Please,
Please .... Make 1.4 work for us
-> me (i'll see what i can do about cleaning up the patch and getting it in for
1.4 beta or at least final)

timeless: feel free to jump back in if you have free cycles.
Assignee: timeless → darin
Target Milestone: mozilla1.4alpha → mozilla1.4beta
Flags: blocking1.4b-
Flags: blocking1.4b+
Flags: blocking1.4?
Flags: blocking1.4+
*** Bug 156018 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Target Milestone: mozilla1.4beta → mozilla1.4final
Attached patch v2 patch (obsolete) — Splinter Review
with this patch i'm able to create and use a profile stored under a UNC file
path.  i haven't fully tested it with all features of the browser, but it seems
to work for most things.  the biggest change from the previous patch is
corrections to the nsLocalFile::Create method.	when attempting to create
parent directories, we have to start at the right spot to avoid trying to
create '\', '\\', '\\host', or '\\host\volume' since CreateDirectory will fail
on all those inputs.  also, Create should tolerate access denied errors since
windows will return access denied for parent directories that the calling
process does not have permission to modify.
Attachment #116142 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #116142 - Flags: superreview?(darin)
Attachment #116142 - Flags: review?(dougt)
Attached patch v2.1 patch (obsolete) — Splinter Review
incorporating dbaron's suggested for loop.
Attachment #123115 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #123117 - Flags: review?(dougt)
Comment on attachment 123117 [details] [diff] [review]
v2.1 patch

nit: drop "nested"
+    // create nested directories to target

nit: is the start here pointing at the wrong thing in both of the diagrams?

+    //   - UNC path:  \\machine\volume\some\path\on\this\drive
+    // 				    ^--- start here

what if the machine part of the file path is empty?  for example: "\\\"

+// return pointer to last instance of the 
+static inline char *GetLastSeparator(const char *str, char sep)

nit: it is probably faster looking at the second char since most paths will
have a | at 1.

 #if defined(XP_WIN) || defined(XP_OS2)
     // If it's a drive letter use the colon notation.
-    if (!leafPointer && result[2] == 0 && result[1] == '|')
+    if (!leafPointer && result[1] == '|' && result[2] == 0)
	 result[1] = ':';
Is it safe to look at result[2] first, or could that UMR?

yeah, i assumed that was the reason why that change was made.  i just carried it
over from the original patch.

dougt: nice catch on the '\\\' cases... i'll make sure to test out those, and
verify that they work correctly.  start here is correct.  you want to start
creating \\machine\volume\some and then \\machine\volume\some\path and so on. 
if you try to create the volume, CreateDirectory will fail.
Attached patch v2.2 patchSplinter Review
revised per comments from dougt.  my system requires a machine name, \\\volume
is not a valid UNC path according to my win2k machine.	that aside, i think the
code would handle \\\volume just fine.
Attachment #123117 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #123117 - Flags: review?(dougt)
Attachment #123242 - Flags: review?(dougt)
Comment on attachment 123242 [details] [diff] [review]
v2.2 patch

Looks good.
Attachment #123242 - Flags: review?(dougt) → review+
Attachment #123242 - Flags: superreview?(dbaron)
Comment on attachment 123242 [details] [diff] [review]
v2.2 patch

>Index: io/nsLocalFileWin.cpp
>+        path++;

I'd prefer |++path;| both for consistency with surrounding code and because of
bug 78032 comment 1.

>Index: obsolete/nsFileSpec.cpp
>+// return pointer to last instance of the given separator
>+static inline char *GetLastSeparator(const char *str, char sep)

|static inline| seems redundant -- how about just |inline|?

>+#if defined(XP_WIN) || defined(XP_OS2)
>+    return (char*) _mbsrchr((const unsigned char *) str, sep);
>+    return (char*) strrchr(str, sep);

No need for the cast here, right?
Attachment #123242 - Flags: superreview?(dbaron) → superreview+

>>Index: io/nsLocalFileWin.cpp
>>+        path++;
>I'd prefer |++path;| both for consistency with surrounding code and because of
>bug 78032 comment 1.

for consistency ok, but ++path would not optimize any better.  this is straight
pointer arithmetic here.. C++ operator overloading is not involved.. nor is any
assignment statement.

>>Index: obsolete/nsFileSpec.cpp
>>+// return pointer to last instance of the given separator
>>+static inline char *GetLastSeparator(const char *str, char sep)
>|static inline| seems redundant -- how about just |inline|?

compiler can choose to ignore |inline|, in which case i would
be afraid of the symbol having extern linkage.  |static| seems
prudent to avoid possible namespace collisions on really lame
build environments... ok, i made that up... but we use |static 
inline| elsewhere, so for consistency ;-)

>>+#if defined(XP_WIN) || defined(XP_OS2)
>>+    return (char*) _mbsrchr((const unsigned char *) str, sep);
>>+    return (char*) strrchr(str, sep);
>No need for the cast here, right?

_mbsrchr returns |const unsigned char*|, so we need the cast for
that, and on some platforms |strrchr| returns |const char*| so
we need the cast there as well.  "man strrchr" on worms (SunOS 5.8) says
that ISO C++ declares strrchr to return |const char*|, and i think i've
been burnt by this before on Solaris.

so, i'd like to just make the postfix to prefix change if that is ok with you.
Comment on attachment 123242 [details] [diff] [review]
v2.2 patch

requesting drivers approval for 1.4 final.  thx!
Attachment #123242 - Flags: approval1.4?
Comment on attachment 123242 [details] [diff] [review]
v2.2 patch

a=asa (on behalf of drivers) for checkin to 1.4
Attachment #123242 - Flags: approval1.4? → approval1.4+
ok, patch is in.  marking FIXED.  i can't guarantee that everything will work
correctly now, but as far as i can tell everything does.  please help me test
this patch in tomorrows nightly build.  if you find a problem please file a new
bug against me.  thanks!
Closed: 22 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
I realize this is a case of "too little- too late" (and possibly irrelevant) but
is there a reason why you cannot use the path functions in the "Shell
Lightweight API" (Shlwapi.dll) library? It seems to have all the path
handling/validation/manipulating functions that we all have to do over and over. 
Also, Mozilla.exe effectively depends on it via a dependency on shell32.dll
I had submitted bug 207282 which appears to be a duplicate of this bug. I have 
since installed Mozilla 1.4 RC1 and can confirm that this problem has been 

I hope that somebody with the power can convince Netscape the importance of 
implementing this patch as quickly as possible.

Netscape 7 is the first Netscape browser that can readily compete with 
Internet Explorer. Unfortunately this bug, which is still present in Netscape 
7.02, basically makes this unusable in a corporate environment with roaming 
profiles (which is the majority). 

I'm a web developer that has had to support Netscape 4.x versions because some 
of our clients have used that as their corporate standard. I have recently 
been told that a major client, Bristol-Meyers Squibb (BMS), will be changing 
to IE 6. It is unfortunate that Netscape 7 couldn't even be considered as an 
option due to this problem.

I hope that somebody at Netscape really understands the serious nature of this 
problem. I think it should be considered as critical as any security bug that 
is found.

Thanks for letting me vent, and for at least patching Mozilla. Now I can test 
my sites with the new version and hope that Netscape will soon follow.

*** Bug 207282 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
This isn't really the place to talk about Netscape releases. If you want such
information, go to a site like (To answer your question, many
think the next Netscape release will be based on Mozilla 1.4.)
verified per comment #70
*** Bug 197308 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.