Improve the parsing of `manifest.json` files in `browser/base/content/test/static/browser_all_files_referenced.js` to support built-in add-ons
Categories
(Firefox :: General, enhancement, P2)
Tracking
()
Tracking | Status | |
---|---|---|
firefox95 | --- | fixed |
People
(Reporter: willdurand, Assigned: rpl)
References
Details
(Whiteboard: [addons-jira])
Attachments
(1 file)
Instead of adding new entries in the exclusion list when this test case fails because of a built-in add-on, we should improve the parseJsonManifest()
function as described in https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D128908#4192312
Updated•3 years ago
|
Reporter | ||
Updated•3 years ago
|
Assignee | ||
Comment 1•3 years ago
|
||
Updated•3 years ago
|
Comment 3•3 years ago
|
||
Backed out for causing mochitests browser chrome failures on browser_startup_syncIPC.js.
Comment 4•3 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Iulian Moraru from comment #3)
Backed out for causing mochitests browser chrome failures on browser_startup_syncIPC.js.
This comes with a profile that shows https://share.firefox.dev/30Me0GL the PGPU::Msg_AddLayerTreeIdMapping sync IPC happens while styling for the first time a dummy.xhtml document created during WEBEXT_BACKGROUND_PAGE_LOAD_MS_BY_ADDONID:addons-search-detection@mozilla.com
Assignee | ||
Comment 5•3 years ago
|
||
The failure was actually triggered by the other patch landed along with this one in the same push (Bug 1735721), and unrelated to the changes in the patch attached to this bug (which can re-land without any additional change).
Nonetheless, Florian pointers from comment 4 were very useful to better understand the failure triggered by Bug 1735721.
We (Florian and I) also discussed further about the failure over Matrix and agreed on what to change in the short run to workaround the test failure as part of Bug 1735721 patch, and then as a separate follow up to try to resume the work on Bug 1582788 (because that would be the actual long term solution).
Comment 7•3 years ago
|
||
bugherder |
Comment 8•3 years ago
|
||
Hello. This bug or Bug 1735721 has caused this regression. Can you please help with identifying which one might be the cause?
Reporter | ||
Comment 9•3 years ago
|
||
This bug cannot be the cause of the regression. It's very likely the other one.
Updated•3 years ago
|
Description
•