287785 - Mozilla asks for java plugin although it is already installed

Status: RESOLVED EXPIRED

(SeaMonkey :: General, defect)

Description

[David]

User-Agent:       Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.5) Gecko/20041217
Build Identifier: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.5) Gecko/20041217

Running Ubuntu linux, and Java(TM) Plug-in 1.5.0_01-b08 is installed.
Bug#: 224395 was a similar case, and marked as a duplicate and supposedly
resolved. It seems to me that there is still a bug lurking. 

Reproducible: Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Instal java
2. Load any web page that has a java applet (I guess).
3.

Actual Results:  
I get a dialogue box saying I need java.

Expected Results:  
mozilla should run the installed Java plugin

Comment 1

[Hermann Schwab]

Do you see the plug-in, if you open Help->About Plug-ins or type about:plugins
into the Location Bar?

Did you read Release Notes and installed correctly?
http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/jre/install-linux.html
http://plugindoc.mozdev.org/linux.html#Java
http://plugindoc.mozdev.org/faqs/java.html#Linux
http://www.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla1.7/installation.html#linux
http://www.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla1.7/installation-extras.html#extras_java

Linux Put a symlink to
/usr/java/jre<version>/plugin/i386/ns610-gcc32/libjavaplugin_oji.so in your
plugins/ directory. (Note copying the file instead of making the symlink will
cause Java to crash.)

With Linux RPM builds, you must install Java as the root user.


Bug 224395 was about Windows, except Bug 224395 Comment 7 and Bug 224395 Comment 9 

Comment 2

[David]

>Do you see the plug-in ... yes, The reference to "Java(TM) Plug-in
1.5.0_01-b08" was pasted from Help/About.

>Did you read Release Notes ... yes
>and installed correctly? ... I hope so!!

>Linux Put a symlink to /usr/java/jre ... 
  (ls -l gives me) /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins/libjavaplugin_oji.so ->
/usr/java/jre1.5.0_01/plugin/i386/ns7/libjavaplugin_oji.so This looks correct to me.

>With Linux RPM builds, you must install Java as the root user... I did this.

>Bug 224395 was about Windows... Yes, and it was marked as a duplicate of
211226, also for Windows. My point is that the bug best described in 224395
rather than 211226 also seems to apply to me and I am on Linux. My bug is
possibly the same as for 224395, ie 224395 perhaps was not platform specific,
whereas 211226 may have been something slightly different. I sometimes wonder
whether one bugs is set to be a duplicate of another too quickly.

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

[David]

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

!!! What the!! so if the problem gets ignored for long enough it 'resolves
itself'!! Oh well, so much for 'free' software, I guess we get what we paid for :-).