Set up windows file associations for .SVG
Categories
(Firefox :: Installer, enhancement, P3)
Tracking
()
Tracking | Status | |
---|---|---|
firefox70 | --- | fixed |
People
(Reporter: duncan.loveday, Assigned: priyanksingh8)
Details
(Keywords: good-first-bug, parity-ie)
Attachments
(2 obsolete files)
Comment 1•16 years ago
|
||
Reporter | ||
Comment 2•16 years ago
|
||
Comment 3•15 years ago
|
||
Comment 4•12 years ago
|
||
Comment 5•7 years ago
|
||
Comment 6•5 years ago
|
||
Moving to installer since that is what actually sets the defaults and this bug should get a decision in that component.
Comment 7•5 years ago
|
||
Comment 1 is still correct, we cannot open SVGZ files, but I don't have any objection to registering as a .svg handler.
Assignee | ||
Comment 8•5 years ago
|
||
I'd like to work on this issue as my first step into open source.
Comment 9•5 years ago
|
||
That's great! Have a look at our introductory guide, and it should take you through the whole process of getting started working on Firefox. If you run into any problems with anything in there, follow its advice about asking in the #introduction IRC channel, and if that fails you can contact me directly. Note that to work on this bug you'll need a Windows computer, since this is a Windows installer thing. To build an installer and try out your changes, you'll need to run ./mach package
after ./mach build
is finished, and then you'll find the packaged installers in the directory obj-x86_64-pc-mingw32/dist/install/sea/
.
For this specific bug, what needs to be done is pretty simple: in a few different places there are lists of file extensions that we install (and uninstall), and .svg
just needs to be added to those lists. For example, one of those lists is here. There are a couple of others in that file, and also one when we uninstall the associations in uninstaller.nsi
. To fix this bug, just follow the patterns that are already there to add lines for .svg
. Then follow the instructions for submitting a patch for review (with me as the reviewer). Thanks!
Assignee | ||
Comment 10•5 years ago
|
||
should I use phabricator for submitting my patch for review?
Comment 11•5 years ago
|
||
ideally, yes if you can.
Assignee | ||
Comment 12•5 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Robert Longson [:longsonr] from comment #11)
ideally, yes if you can.
Is there any other way apart from phabricator?
Comment 13•5 years ago
|
||
What's the problem with phabricator?
Assignee | ||
Comment 14•5 years ago
|
||
Assignee | ||
Comment 15•5 years ago
|
||
Depends on D41477
Updated•5 years ago
|
Updated•5 years ago
|
Updated•5 years ago
|
Comment 16•5 years ago
|
||
Comment 17•5 years ago
|
||
bugherder |
Description
•