printing in Firefox gives incomplete documents
Categories
(Core :: Printing: Output, defect)
Tracking
()
People
(Reporter: pnewell0705, Unassigned)
References
Details
Attachments
(3 files)
User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/91.0
Steps to reproduce:
in Firefox, print a webpage
Actual results:
prints with sections not printed (will add comment after submitting with details and scans of what was printed)
Expected results:
print everything that is on webpage
[NOTE: I am typing this report on my Linux box so the Version is 91 while I am also reporting problem on macOS version 95]
I am trying to print a webpage and I can see that a section in the middle is not being printed. I can confirm in Safari that the entire page is printable.
The page is https://www.bonappetit.com/recipe/slow-cooker-beer-braised-brisket
I tested on three variations to try to confirm this is a potential bug (I think very probable but it is for you to make the call). The first is on Centos 7.9.2009 with Firefox 91.4.0esr. The second is macOS Catalina v.10.15.7 with Firefox 95.0.2. The third is macOS Catalina v.10.15.7 with Safari v15.2. In both versions of Firefox, you will see that "Step 2" is missing (and, on the Linux test, you can actually see the top of the line which says "Step 2"). In the Safari test, "Step 2" is printed (to prove that the different layout has nothing to do with it, on Safari test you can see there is no loss of info from page 2 to page 3 ... that being where the missing "Step 2" is in the Linux versions)
I am going to submit this additional comment and then submit 9 images corresponding to the 3 page of each of the tests. The pages are labelled on the pages as well as in the file name
|
||
Comment 2•4 years ago
|
||
The Bugbug bot thinks this bug should belong to the 'Core::Printing: Output' component, and is moving the bug to that component. Please revert this change in case you think the bot is wrong.
|
||
Comment 6•4 years ago
|
||
On my Linux box, "Don't miss out ..." banner obscures "Step 2".
I am not seeing any "Don't miss out ..." with Firefox on linux or macOS or Safari on macOS. The phrase sounds like an ad as opposed to part of the recipe? For what it is worth, I have nothing covering any part of the recipe.
|
||
Comment 9•4 years ago
|
||
Yes, I think this is precisely a duplicate of bug 1740304. In particular, based on my testing:
- In Print Preview, everything is ~fine -- no content is missing (for me, "Step 2" is sliced across pages, which isn't great, but it is present at least).
- ...but when I print to PDF, the content on page 3 is shifted upwards by a few lines (with respect to the print-preview), so that "Step 3" is shown at the top instead of "Step 2". And Step 2 (and its contents) is entirely missing (it's been shoved off the top of page 3).
|
|
||
Comment 10•4 years ago
|
||
(Thank you very much for filing and for taking the time to post those printout attachments!)
|
Reporter | |
Comment 11•4 years ago
|
||
Glad I was able to provide a good bug report.
From what I can tell by looking at 1740304, it appears it is considered fixed and won't get ported any earlier than Firefox 97 (not certain what "affected" means). So that is when I would expect to have it working on Firefox on macOS?
As for Firefox on Centos 7, 91esr is marked as fix-optional. That makes it sounds like it won't happen. I've already reported that there were problems with 2-sided printing and with header/footer printing which I have seen evidence that they appear to no be working on macOS Firefox. I've been told they won't show up in 91esr and the next esr will be summer. I can live with that as they are just nuisances. But Firefox not print everything on the screen is more than a nuisance. It says I cannot print anything over one page long on Linux without the possibility that it will be an incorrect printing. Makes it kinda useless.
Can I make a push saying this problem is a big enough to warrant pushing out to 91esr? I really don't think the solution of "well, power up your laptop, log in, get that page in Firefox there (or Safari), print, logout out and power down the laptop" is a very good solution as it just generates teeth-nashing. To be more polite, can I say "please!"
Paul
|
|
||
Comment 12•4 years ago
|
||
(In reply to paul from comment #11)
Glad I was able to provide a good bug report.
From what I can tell by looking at 1740304, it appears it is considered fixed and won't get ported any earlier than Firefox 97 (not certain what "affected" means).
"Affected" means the-bug-is-present-and-not-fixed in that version (97 in this case, i.e. current development version).
In other words, we don't have a fix yet. Once we do, bug 1740304 will be changed to have status RESOLVED|FIXED (and the version-specific status field will change from 'afffected' to 'fixed' for whatever version the fix lands in).
91esr is marked as fix-optional. That makes it sounds like it won't happen.
"fix-optional" means it could happen, and the decision will be made once there's a fix (and depends on the complexity of the patch, the estimated risk or lack-thereof that it might introduce new unforseen issues, etc).
I fully understand and agree that it would be nice to have this fixed on 91 (once we've got a fix); we can see how that calculus looks once someone's written a fix over on bug 1740304.
|
|
Reporter | |
Comment 13•4 years ago
|
||
Daniel:
Thank you for correcting my assumptions about what "affected" and "fix-optional" mean. I mis-read something somewhere and was under the impression 1740304 had a fix but wasn't tested. I can't figure out how I came up with that now so I'll just blame it on "a senior moment"
Thanks for appreciating my concern with getting a fix into 91esr once you can get a fix into the mainline (97?). I guess I need to add myself to the cc for 1740304 so I can see when its status gets flipped
Paul
|
|
Reporter | |
Comment 14•4 years ago
|
||
I see I am already on cc list for bug 1740304 ... pardon my prior noise about such
|
|
||
Comment 15•4 years ago
|
||
Good news: I confirmed that this bug doesn't reproduce in a build with the patch that I've just posted on bug 1740304.
(Also, regarding your request for esr91 uplift: I suspect we'll be able to do that, since the patch is extremely targeted & seems likely to have been a small oversight, and the chance of side-effects seems pretty minimal in my opinion.)
I did run into another issue with the site when retesting this, and I spun off bug 1752421 for that.
|
|
Reporter | |
Comment 16•4 years ago
|
||
Daniel:
Thanks for the update which is clearly good news. Especially the getting this is esr91.x.
I see the new issue created for bug 1752421 and that I am cc-ed on it. Not certain that is something that needs to be dealt with as well so that I get good print previews and, more importantly, good printings.
Paul
|
|
||
Comment 17•4 years ago
|
||
Yes, we can focus on that issue in that bug (bug 1752421); it's a different problem with a different root cause.
|
|
Reporter | |
Comment 18•4 years ago
|
||
To Daniel and everyone who worked on this issue:
Right about the time I was going to sign off and go to bed, my Centos 7 box (via yum) let me know that 91.6.0esr was available to download. I decided I better do it now rather than waiting til morning as my curiosity about whether this was fixed would make major disturbances in my ability to get to sleep.
Did a physical print of that brisket web page (I can't tell you how bad I want my roommate to cook it to see if the recipe was worth the bug report (smile)) under 91.5.0esr. Did a yum update and rebooted to make sure it took. Did a physical print of same under 91.6.0esr.
91.6.0esr prints correctly.
A huge thanks to everyone who worked on this bug and to those who were willing to let it go into 91.x.esr. It is really a good sense that printing out of Firefox will be accurate ... and I didn't have to wait for the next major esr release
Once again, thanks,
Paul
|
|
||
Comment 19•4 years ago
|
||
Great, thanks for verifying that it's fixed! Enjoy the brisket. :)
Description
•