Closed
Bug 540020
Opened 14 years ago
Closed 13 years ago
CSS Alignment Problem
Categories
(Core :: Layout: Floats, defect)
Tracking
()
RESOLVED
WORKSFORME
People
(Reporter: padraig.fahy, Unassigned)
References
()
Details
(Keywords: regression)
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2) Gecko/20100105 Firefox/3.6 Build Identifier: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2) Gecko/20100105 Firefox/3.6 In Firefox 3.6Beta5 and Firefox 3.6RC1 there has been a alignment problem with the navigation bar as seen here (http://up.ppy.sh/files/ff3.6.jpg) The administrator of osu! has asked us to report the bug here as it is not a problem with HIS CSS coding. All other browsers seem to display this ok without a problem Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. Just access the site. 2. 3. Actual Results: Tends to be in the way of the custom Google Search bar and links onto my own profile Expected Results: Moved the links into the pink strip on the site
Comment 1•14 years ago
|
||
Confirmed with latest trunk on Windows Vista. Changeset 3c25f8166818 worked fine, but not changeset 547693481fd4 (15 Jul 2009). Query: http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/pushloghtml?fromchange=3c25f8166818&tochange=547693481fd4
Component: General → Layout
Product: Firefox → Core
QA Contact: general → layout
Version: unspecified → 1.9.2 Branch
Updated•14 years ago
|
Keywords: regression
With Linux x86_64 nightlies the range is between 2009-07-14-04-mozilla-central and 2009-07-15-05-mozilla-central, i.e., http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/pushloghtml?fromchange=9b4dd06e1c9d&tochange=c40a68c662da The overlap between your range and mine is: http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/pushloghtml?fromchange=3c25f8166818&tochange=c40a68c662da
My guess would be that it's caused by bug 499377, though I haven't tested this.
Updated•14 years ago
|
Status: UNCONFIRMED → NEW
Ever confirmed: true
Updated•14 years ago
|
Status: NEW → UNCONFIRMED
Ever confirmed: false
I no longer see the site linked to having the alignment problem in the 1.9.2 branch shown in the attached image. I'm not sure if that's because the code was changed on the site, but without a test case attached should we resolve this as WORKSFORME?
Possible it was fixed by bug 551425, but hard to know without a testcase.
Status: UNCONFIRMED → RESOLVED
Closed: 13 years ago
Resolution: --- → WORKSFORME
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•