Closed Bug 427691 Opened 12 years ago Closed 12 years ago
"ASSERTION: Bad count" adding script during mutation event
Loading the testcase triggers: ###!!! ASSERTION: Bad count: 'lastBlocker == sBlockedScriptRunners->Count() && sRunnersCountAtFirstBlocker == 0', file /Users/jruderman/trunk/mozilla/content/base/src/nsContentUtils.cpp, line 4027 Then, shutting down Firefox triggers: ###!!! ASSERTION: How'd this happen?: '!sBlockedScriptRunners || sBlockedScriptRunners->Count() == 0', file /Users/jruderman/trunk/mozilla/content/base/src/nsContentUtils.cpp, line 831 This happens both without and with the patch in bug 423355 comment 39. I'm filing this as security-sensitive out of caution, since the assertion involves code added in bug 423355, which is security-sensitive.
> I'm filing this as security-sensitive out of caution, since the assertion > involves code added in bug 423355, which is security-sensitive. I meant bug 401155.
Why should this block 1.9 in particular? Could we take this in a dot release? re-nom if necessary.
It's a recent regression of a security-related invariant. Jonas needs to decide whether the reason the assertion is firing is bad enough to need fixing in 1.9.0, basically... That evaluation we should definitely block on.
Flags: blocking1.9- → blocking1.9?
I'll look into this.
Flags: blocking1.9? → blocking1.9+
This sounds like it's a really scary state, but it's something we can fix in a dot-release.
Assignee: nobody → jonas
Flags: blocking1.9+ → blocking1.9-
Priority: -- → P1
I'm unable to reproduce this on windows. Mac-only or fixed?
I can no longer reproduce this bug.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 12 years ago
Resolution: --- → WORKSFORME
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.