272513 - Open file with... field doesn't allow editing. Thus no command line options can be passed to executable.

Status: RESOLVED EXPIRED

(Firefox :: Settings UI, defect)

Description

[Martin Swift]

User-Agent:       Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.7.5) Gecko/20041121 Firefox/1.0
Build Identifier: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.7.5) Gecko/20041121 Firefox/1.0

When changing file handling in Edit>Preferences>Downloads[File Types]>Change
Action the "Open them in this application" text field does not allow input. That
is; the only way to choose an application is by picking an executable file with
the "Choose Application..." dialog.
This means that there is no way of passing command line options to
afforementioned executables (e.g. entering /usr/X11R6/bin/urxvt -e vim).

Reproducible: Always
Steps to Reproduce:
1. Edit>Prefernces
2. Choose Download, pick a file type and press "Change Action..."
3. Try to type in the textfield under the "Open them in this application" option
4. If this works for you ... too bad for me :-(
Actual Results:  
Could not type in the field

Expected Results:  
Well, entered the text that I typed ..

Workaround: put the command in an executable script, e.g.:

#!/usr/local/bin/sh
urxvt -e vim $1

Comment 1

[Ganesh]

I see this problem but I also feel that the way it is behaving now is correct
because opening thru' the file picker allows you to check whether the particular
application is there or not. If we make the text field in "Open them inthis
application" editable then users can type any junk and it will simply accept on
OK   like how Mozilla behaves..

In any case users can always type in the file picker which gets popped up.

Comment 2

[Martin Swift]

(In reply to comment #1)
> I see this problem but I also feel that the way it is behaving now is correct
> because opening thru' the file picker[, it] allows you to check whether the
particular
> application is there or not.

Great, so if I need to browse for my application, I can do so. Thing is: that is
not what this bug report was about.

> If we make the text field in "Open them inthis
> application" editable then users can type any junk and it will simply accept on
> OK   like how Mozilla behaves..

What is wrong with that? Were the user to enter a bogus path, would there be any
harm done?

I fooled around with the script shown in the workaround. Removing the file
simply caused the Download window to be opened. So; issuing the path to a
non-existant executable causes no problems.

> In any case users can always type in the file picker which gets popped up.

The file, yes. But not the command line arguments ... and this is what the bug
report was about.

Comment 3

[Gervase Markham [:gerv]]

This is an automated message, with ID "auto-resolve01".

This bug has had no comments for a long time. Statistically, we have found that
bug reports that have not been confirmed by a second user after three months are
highly unlikely to be the source of a fix to the code.

While your input is very important to us, our resources are limited and so we
are asking for your help in focussing our efforts. If you can still reproduce
this problem in the latest version of the product (see below for how to obtain a
copy) or, for feature requests, if it's not present in the latest version and
you still believe we should implement it, please visit the URL of this bug
(given at the top of this mail) and add a comment to that effect, giving more
reproduction information if you have it.

If it is not a problem any longer, you need take no action. If this bug is not
changed in any way in the next two weeks, it will be automatically resolved.
Thank you for your help in this matter.

The latest beta releases can be obtained from:
Firefox:     http://www.mozilla.org/projects/firefox/
Thunderbird: http://www.mozilla.org/products/thunderbird/releases/1.5beta1.html
Seamonkey:   http://www.mozilla.org/projects/seamonkey/

Comment 4

[Gervase Markham [:gerv]]

This bug has been automatically resolved after a period of inactivity (see above
comment). If anyone thinks this is incorrect, they should feel free to reopen it.

Comment 5

[Mike Connor [:mconnor]]

sorry for bugspam, long-overdue mass reassign of ancient QA contact bugs,
filter on "beltznerLovesGoats" to get rid of this mass change