Closed Bug 556119 Opened 14 years ago Closed 14 years ago

ASSERTION: bad hint in chrome code: 'hint != XOW && hint != SOW && hint != COW' when calling nsIInstallLocation.getItemFile()

Categories

(Core :: XPConnect, defect)

x86
Windows 7
defect
Not set
normal

Tracking

()

RESOLVED WORKSFORME
Tracking Status
blocking2.0 --- betaN+

People

(Reporter: jgriffin, Assigned: mrbkap)

Details

Attachments

(1 file)

When calling nsIInstallLocation.getItemFile() within an extension, the following assertion occurs:

###!!! ASSERTION: bad hint in chrome code: 'hint != XOW && hint != SOW && hint != COW', file c:/mozilla/mozilla-central/src/js/src/xpconnect/src/xpcwrappednativescope.cpp, line 1043

This happens on Windows XP and Windows 7, but not Linux (CentOS 5).

To reproduce:

1 - install the attached extension on a Windows machine
2 - from Firefox's Tools menu, select "Grafx Bot"
3 - press the Start button
>>>> you will see the assertion mentioned

In debugging this, it appears the assertion occurs when calling this line of code (in content/test-driver.js):

    var jsm = CC["@mozilla.org/extensions/manager;1"]
              .getService(CI.nsIExtensionManager)
              .getInstallLocation(id)
              .getItemFile(id, "modules/grafxbot.jsm");

where id = "grafxbot@mozilla.org".

The call completes successfully despite the assertion.
Attached file test extension
blocking2.0: --- → ?
We need to at least understand what this means before we ship.
blocking2.0: ? → beta1+
jgriffin, I only have Linux and OSX here, so I can't test... does this still happen?
This problem no longer occurs with Grafx Bot, as I refactored some code for other reasons and the code that was leading to this assertion is no longer present.

However, I've also seen it in another context, since the new AddOn manager landed on trunk.  If you install or uninstall any addon, then click Restart, the same assertion occurs.  I'll check and see if this occurs on the Mac as well.
Yes, this assertion occurs on Mac as well, in the context described in comment #4.
blocking2.0: beta1+ → beta2+
Moving to betaN based on comment 2
blocking2.0: beta2+ → betaN+
Who owns this?  Need an owner ASAP.
Blake should own this. Blake, please see comment 5.
Assignee: nobody → mrbkap
The code that caused this is gone thanks to compartments.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 14 years ago
Resolution: --- → WORKSFORME
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.

Attachment

General

Created:
Updated:
Size: