Closed Bug 448351 Opened 12 years ago Closed 12 years ago

In <firefox.exe.manifest>, |manifest authoring warning 81010002:Unrecognized Element "trustInfo" in namespace "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:asm.v3"|

Categories

(Core :: General, defect, minor)

x86
Windows 2000
defect
Not set
minor

Tracking

()

RESOLVED WONTFIX

People

(Reporter: sgautherie, Unassigned)

References

()

Details

Example with Firefox:
{{
Creating Resource file: module.res

rc.exe  -DMOZ_PHOENIX [...] .../browser/app/module.rc

link -NOLOGO -OUT:firefox.exe [...] msimg32.lib

.../mozilla/browser/app/firefox.exe.manifest:manifest authoring warning 81010002:Unrecognized Element "trustInfo" in namespace "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:asm.v3".
}}

I assume it applies to the other 4 applications too.
Product: Firefox → Core
QA Contact: general → general
Cause seems to be a version mismatch:

<http://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/browser/app/firefox.exe.manifest>
{{
 2 <assembly xmlns="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:asm.v1" manifestVersion="1.0">

22 <ms_asmv3:trustInfo xmlns:ms_asmv3="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:asm.v3">
}}

<http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/6ad1fshk.aspx>
{{
Elements and Attributes

The trustInfo element is required and is in the asm.v2 namespace.
}}

NB: In case it matters, I'm using VC++ v8/2005 SP1 and PSDK 2003 R2.

***

Ftr, bug 378598 comment 13:
{{
Robert Strong [:rs] (do not email)   2007-04-24 16:44:10 PDT

I don't know of any value either way regarding using v2 vs v3... I have seen v3
showing up more lately but nothing in the way of reasons to use one vs. the
other. I did notice that the manifest parsing restart bug references using v3.
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/921337

either way is fine with me on the version and thanks
}}

***

2 others occurrences:
<http://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla/search?string=trustInfo&case=on>
{{
/tools/build-environment/win32/noprivs.manifest
/tools/build-environment/win32/Mercurial-1.0.1.exe
}}
Blocks: 378598, 437349, 445545
(In reply to comment #2)
> It's a known bug of VS2005.
> https://connect.microsoft.com/VisualStudio/feedback/ViewFeedback.aspx?FeedbackID=237720

Well, that says VS2005 (mt.exe) does not recognize "v3",
but it doesn't say "v2" is not to be used (anymore), does it ?

***

Let's see a few (random) links:

As I have yet to read/learn anything defining what "v3" actually is (compared to "v2"),
besides "v3 (is better) for Vista" ... but is it really mandatory ?

<http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb545961.aspx>
{{
<trustInfo xmlns="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:asm.v2">
}}

<http://blogs.msdn.com/amitava/archive/2007/07/16/certified-for-windows-vista-logo-test-case-faq.aspx>
{{
<trustInfo xmlns="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:asm.v3">
...
<trustInfo xmlns="urn:schemas-microsoft.com:asm.v2">
...
<trustInfo xmlns="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:asm.v2"> should be used instead of .v3
}}

<http://www.codeproject.com/KB/vista-security/UAC__The_Definitive_Guide.aspx?display=Print>
{{
Apparently, a malformed v3 manifest file will cause Windows XP SP2 to crash.
...
Also, apparently v2 manifests are significantly more stable and yet still work.
}}

> INVALID?

Fwiw,
<http://www.vistax64.com/vista-security/68733-manifest-creation-using-mt-exe-unrecognized-element-requestedprivi.html>
{{
It also turns out that the warning is "harmless" in that the HTML does get
embedded into the manifest and recognized by Vista even with the warning.
}}
(In reply to comment #3)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > It's a known bug of VS2005.
> > https://connect.microsoft.com/VisualStudio/feedback/ViewFeedback.aspx?FeedbackID=237720
>...
> Fwiw,
> <http://www.vistax64.com/vista-security/68733-manifest-creation-using-mt-exe-unrecognized-element-requestedprivi.html>
> {{
> It also turns out that the warning is "harmless" in that the HTML does get
> embedded into the manifest and recognized by Vista even with the warning.
> }}
Did you install the SDK tools? I believe it contains the updated mt.exe... not sure we will use it but I thought we did if it is present.

Either way, what are you asking to be done since this warning is "harmless" as you note?
Don't care, it's just a warning.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 12 years ago
Resolution: --- → WONTFIX
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.