307384 - Software Update incorrectly retries if multiple Windows XP users are logged in

Status: RESOLVED FIXED

(Toolkit :: Application Update, defect)

Description

[David Tenser [:djst]]

The Software Update feature doesn't work properly when multiple users are logged
in and someone else is running Firefox at the same time. The bug here is that
the Software Update doesn't detect it. Instead, it reports that the
incremental/partial update failed and that it's going to try with the full
update. Once that is downloaded, it will ask the user to restart Firefox, only
to be presented with the Update feature again, and again. It simply doesn't
realize Firefox is used by another user.

Steps to reproduce:

1. Start Firefox in Windows XP using User A.
2. Press Win+L to go to the login screen and log in as User B.
3. Run the Software Update or wait for it to start automatically.

Actual behavior:

Firefox retries the software update without realizing User A is using Firefox
and thus making it impossible to replace the updated files.

Expected behavior: 

An error message should be displayed, explaining that other users are blocking
Software Update from updating Firefox.

Comment 1

[Ben Turner (not reading bugmail, use the needinfo flag!)]

Is this a dupe of bug 302969?

Comment 2

[David Tenser [:djst]]

It looks like bug 302969 is covering the same use case, but not the same bug.
Maybe they're both related though.

Comment 3

[Darin Fisher]

In this use case, is the Firefox application directory writable by both users?

Comment 4

[David Tenser [:djst]]

Yes, both accounts have Administrator privileges. Closing Firefox on one of the
accounts will allow the other account to update Firefox without problems again.

Comment 5

[Mike Schroepfer]

Darin - can you take a look?

Comment 6

[Adam Kowalczyk]

Just for the record, obviously same thing happens when MOZ_NO_REMOTE=1.

Comment 7

[Adam Kowalczyk]

Just for the record, obviously same thing happens when MOZ_NO_REMOTE=1.

Comment 8

[Ben Goodger (use ben at mozilla dot org for email)]

Darin said his plan here is to instead of failing over to complete update when a
patch/update fails to apply due to files being in use, instead defer application
until next start. 

Comment 9

[Ben Turner (not reading bugmail, use the needinfo flag!)]

(From comment #8)
> Darin said his plan here is to instead of failing over to complete update 
when a
> patch/update fails to apply due to files being in use, instead defer 
application
> until next start. 

See bug 306961.

Comment 10

[Darin Fisher]

This can be marked FIXED now that my patch for bug 306961 is in.