47587 - jpg images not loading

Status: RESOLVED INVALID

(Core :: Layout, defect, P3)

Description

[Todd Hammer]

From Bugzilla Helper:
User-Agent: Mozilla/4.73 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20smp i686)
BuildID:    2000080404

jpg images in this gallery are not loading at all. Other images (jpg, gif,
etc..) load correctly, just not the gallery jpg's. Mozilla did not appear to
suffer or crash from viewing this page.

Reproducible: Always
Steps to Reproduce:
1. browse to http://www.hfhdc.org/media/gallery_0/index.html
2.
3.

Actual Results:  							

Expected Results:

Comment 1

[John Unruh]

The images do load. Linux-148 sec. Mac-127 sec. WinNT-235 sec.
WinNT Nav 4.75 - about 3 seconds.

Comment 2

[Asa Dotzler [:asa]]

these images load up fine by themselves.  must be something wacky in the HTML.
will try to investigate and testcase soon.

Comment 3

[Marcello Nuccio]

I confirm: the images do load, but it takes a very very long time even
if it does not eat CPU time.

Comment 4

[Alex]

worksforme but it took 153.554 seconds on cable im guessing a slow server,
nothing more. 

Comment 5

[Asa Dotzler [:asa]]

I don't think the server is the problem since the images load quickly if loaded
by themselves.  We need a testcase for why they are slowed down when included
int he page.

Comment 6

[Asa Dotzler [:asa]]

over to layout since I haven't done anything with a testcase. sorry. will still
try to testcase if I find the time

Comment 7

[Peter Lubczynski]

I'm not seeing this at all using yesterday's build on NT. The page loads up just 
as quick as any other page. Will try on Linux...

Comment 8

[Peter Lubczynski]

Just tried this Linux on today's build and it's pretty quick (6 secs). Can 
anyone else verify this or mark it WORKSFORME.

Comment 9

[Asa Dotzler [:asa]]

[e-mail], try clearing your cache.  It is still slow here on
NT and linux 090708 builds.

Comment 10

[Todd Hammer]

As the author of the page that was causing the problem, I realized that only
WIDTH was being specified for <IMG> tags. Adding HEIGHT fixed the problem.
Curious though, that NS4.7 and IE5.5 displayed them just fine either way.