Closed Bug 184108 Opened 22 years ago Closed 21 years ago

Save As <<filename>> without <<.html>> extention result is a html file <<filename>> and a directory <<_files>>

Categories

(Core Graveyard :: File Handling, defect)

x86
Linux
defect
Not set
normal

Tracking

(Not tracked)

RESOLVED FIXED

People

(Reporter: froelants, Assigned: law)

References

Details

Attachments

(2 files)

User-Agent:       Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130
Build Identifier: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130

When I saved a complete webpage with mozilla 1.11 using the "Save as" menuitem
and I entered only the name of the page without .html extention it resulted in a
html file filename.html and a directory filename_files . This version does that
any more. I need to enter the complete name. Saving two pages in one directory
results in problems, the second time does the directory _files already exists.

Reproducible: Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1.menu: file - Save As
2.enter <<filename>> without .html


Actual Results:  
a html file filename
a directory _files

Expected Results:  
a html file filename.html or filename
a directory filename_files

I'm using Suse8.0 and mozilla is installed in /opt/mozilla
==> File Handling
Assignee: dougt → law
Component: Networking: File → File Handling
QA Contact: benc → petersen
This is a webbrowserpersist bug.
Assignee: law → adamlock
I don't have Suse but I can verify with RH on a recent build. From the looks of
it, it is due to the file selector not putting the proper file extension on the
document name when it tells it to save. The perist object doesn't append an
extension for itself, expecting the caller to do that.

Reassigning to module owner.
Assignee: adamlock → law
Status: UNCONFIRMED → NEW
Ever confirmed: true
Attached patch fixSplinter Review
Attachment #124053 - Flags: superreview?(bz-bugspam)
Attachment #124053 - Flags: review?(cbiesinger)
Attachment #124053 - Flags: superreview?(bz-bugspam) → superreview+
Comment on attachment 124053 [details] [diff] [review]
fix

r+ because this code is broken; but it doesn't fix this bug.

I will attach a patch that does fix it.
Attachment #124053 - Flags: review?(cbiesinger) → review+
Comment on attachment 124545 [details] [diff] [review]
additional fix

bz - this is a really small patch, would be great if you could find the time to
sr it
Attachment #124545 - Flags: superreview?(bz-bugspam)
Attachment #124545 - Flags: review?(timeless)
Attachment #124545 - Flags: review?(timeless) → review+
Comment on attachment 124545 [details] [diff] [review]
additional fix

sr=me, but this looks identical to timeless' patch, so if you were going to
make other changes, you forgot to...
Attachment #124545 - Flags: superreview?(bz-bugspam) → superreview+
bz: yeah, it is identical, but in a different file :)
Ah.  Yeah, we need both changed... friggin' code duplication.  :(
checked in
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 21 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Flags: blocking1.4?
Flags: blocking1.4?
*** Bug 216818 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Product: Core → Core Graveyard
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.

Attachment

General

Creator:
Created:
Updated:
Size: