282186 - sync xpfe text.xml with toolkit text.xml

Status: RESOLVED FIXED

(Core :: XUL, defect)

Description

[Mike Connor [:mconnor]]

this one is fairly trivial, but iirc this is suboptimal since it should depend
on a pref.  Whoever fixes this check with Neil please.

Comment 1

[Serge Gautherie (:sgautherie)]

Attachment: 2005.03.08 X2T diff report

Diff from Xpfe to Toolkit version.

This one would look simple enough for me to take:
What would be the expected non-regression test(s) for these changes ?

Comment 2

[[e-mail]]

If anything you should fix the uninitialized variable in the toolkit version ;-)

Comment 3

[Serge Gautherie (:sgautherie)]

(In reply to comment #2)
> If anything you should fix the uninitialized variable in the toolkit version ;-)

Right, I'll do tonight !
(I had to read the code 3 more times to see why; I'm still sleepy I guess ;-<)

Comment 4

[Serge Gautherie (:sgautherie)]

Attachment: (Av1-XPFE) 2005.03.11 X2T diff report

I have had this patch in my installed v1.8b1 for a few days;
Is a specific non-regression test needed ? (which ?)

Could you (super-)review/check in this patch ? Thanks.

Comment 5

[Serge Gautherie (:sgautherie)]

(In reply to comment #0)
> this one is fairly trivial, but iirc this is suboptimal since it should depend
> on a pref.  Whoever fixes this check with Neil please.

Mike, (Neil):
I'm the one ;-> What did you meant ?

Comment 6

[[e-mail]]

Comment on attachment 177082 [details] [diff] [review]
(Av1-XPFE) 2005.03.11 X2T diff report

I'd like to claim that the xpfe version is better because it has
mUnderlineAccesskey declared as a field of the label-control that actually uses
it rather than text-label.

Comment 7

[[e-mail]]

(In reply to comment #5)
>(In reply to comment #0)
>>this one is fairly trivial, but iirc this is suboptimal since it should depend
>>on a pref.  Whoever fixes this check with Neil please.
>Mike, (Neil):
>I'm the one ;-> What did you meant ?
Actually the pref code already exists in the label-control constructor.

Comment 8

[Serge Gautherie (:sgautherie)]

Attachment: (Bv1-TK) <text.xml> (Toolkit update)

Av1, with comment 6 suggestion(s).

Comment 9

[Serge Gautherie (:sgautherie)]

(In reply to comment #3)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > If anything you should fix the uninitialized variable in the toolkit version ;-)
> 
> Right, I'll do tonight !

(for the record)
This was done in bug 260527.

Comment 10

[Serge Gautherie (:sgautherie)]

Attachment: (Bv2-TK) <text.xml> [Checkin: Comment 13 & 14]

Bv1-TK, updated to current Trunk.

Trivial code move: untested, but works fine in XPFE...

Comment 11

[Serge Gautherie (:sgautherie)]

Attachment: (Cv1-XPFE) <text.xml>

This part comes from bug 280065 and followups.

Untested.

Comment 12

[Serge Gautherie (:sgautherie)]

Comment on attachment 221203 [details] [diff] [review]
(Bv2-TK) <text.xml>
[Checkin: Comment 13 & 14]


'approval-branch-1.8.1=?': (Toolkit only)
Trivial U.I. code synchronization (was XPFE->Toolkit, now Trunk->branch), no
risk.

Comment 13

[Serge Gautherie (:sgautherie)]

Comment on attachment 221203 [details] [diff] [review]
(Bv2-TK) <text.xml>
[Checkin: Comment 13 & 14]


Checkin: { 2006-05-11 11:48	bugzilla%standard8.demon.co.uk 	mozilla/toolkit/content/widgets/text.xml 	1.28 }

Comment 14

[Serge Gautherie (:sgautherie)]

Comment on attachment 221203 [details] [diff] [review]
(Bv2-TK) <text.xml>
[Checkin: Comment 13 & 14]


Checkin: {
2006-05-18 09:57	bugzilla%standard8.demon.co.uk 	mozilla/toolkit/content/widgets/text.xml 	1.18.2.6 	MOZILLA_1_8_BRANCH
}

Comment 15

[Robert Kaiser]

SeaMonkey is using toolkit now, is there anything we still need to port from xpfe text.xml to toolkit or can we close this bug?

Comment 16

[[e-mail]]

IIRC XPFE text.xml has nothing new.

Comment 17

[Robert Kaiser]

in this case, I'm marking th bug fixed (due to it containing fixes that have been checked in). Please reopen or file new bugs if we run across something unexpected we still would need to port to toolkit.