<a class="header-button" href="https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/home" title="Go to home page"> Bugzilla

Comment 5

•

15 years ago

Same as / similar to bug 563361? That one seems to be about how OOPP works using object tag but not an embed tag - perhaps that's the same difference between v.2 and v.14 of the video player?

Comment 6

•

15 years ago

Download tab is a div that gets a dynamic object tab inserted: <object height="337" width="512" data="/av/video/gecko/alpha/player.swf" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" id="GeckoVideoPlayer1"><param value="high" name="quality"><param value="always" name="allowScriptAccess"><param value="transparent" name="wMode"><param value="true" name="swLiveConnect"><param value="opaque" name="wmode"><param value="#666666" name="bgcolor"><param value="noscale" name="scale"><param value="lt" name="salign"> [...] </object> Looks like CNet TV is pretty much the same (div that then gets an object tag inserted: <object height="300" width="812" data="http://cnettv.cnet.com/av/video/cnettv/4/20100524/player.swf" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" id="GeckoVideoPlayer1"><param value="high" name="quality"><param value="always" name="allowScriptAccess"><param value="opaque" name="wMode"><param value="true" name="swLiveConnect"><param value="opaque" name="wmode"><param value="#000000" name="bgcolor"><param value="noscale" name="scale"><param value="lt" name="salign"><param value="true" name="allowFullScreen"> [...] </object>

MrX1980

Comment 7

•

15 years ago

Confirmed with: - Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.2; de; rv:1.9.2.4) Gecko/20100527 Firefox/3.6.4 - Adobe Flash Player 10,1,53,60 (10.1rc6) - Gainward GeForce GT 240 Golden Sample - nVIDIA ForceWare 197.44 (6.14.11.9744)

Daniel Veditz [:dveditz]

Comment 8

•

15 years ago

possibly blocking 1.9.2.4 so we'll mark it so to keep this tracked. Otherwise it'll get fixed in 1.9.2.5

blocking1.9.2: ? → .4+

status1.9.2: --- → wanted

Comment 9

•

15 years ago

I've been trying to diagnose this, it seems similar to bug 563361. There is a pre-roll advertisement video associated with this that seems to load, and then shutdown. Then the video loads up. Neither the ad, or the video play. Looking at the logs and stepping through a bit, I'm currently at a loss as to what might be the cause.

Comment 10

•

15 years ago

I pinged CNet about this issue.

Comment 11

•

15 years ago

Is this limited to download.com videos, or a subset of the CNet video offerings?

Comment 12

•

15 years ago

(In reply to comment #11) > Is this limited to download.com videos, or a subset of the CNet video > offerings? Seems to be specific to older editor's review videos. I've found some new review videos work just fine. Older one's don't, likely due to the upgraded video player mentioned in comment 4. If you start here, you can click through and find some videos working, some not - http://download.cnet.com/windows/3150-20_4-0.html?listType=2&sort=editorsRating+asc&tag=rb_content;contentNav

Comment 13

•

15 years ago

any idea of what the problem is and when it will be fixed if there is a problem?

Comment 14

•

15 years ago

Right now it's unclear if this is a problem with our code, or a problem with the CNet TV3 v.14 video player that our code has exposed. Christian - have you heard back from CNet yet? We need to escalate and then determine if this is limited to that player, or affecting other players. Matt Burles - are you also only seeing this on older editor review videos on CNet via the Download tab in their UI?

Summary: [OOPP] Cnet Video does not work, yet on other browsers / previous versions it did → [OOPP] Cnet TV Gecko v.14 flash player does not work with OOPP

Comment 15

•

15 years ago

(In reply to comment #14) > Right now it's unclear if this is a problem with our code, or a problem with > the CNet TV3 v.14 video player that our code has exposed. > > Christian - have you heard back from CNet yet? We need to escalate and then > determine if this is limited to that player, or affecting other players. > > Matt Burles - are you also only seeing this on older editor review videos on > CNet via the Download tab in their UI? Yes it is only occuring on older videos so I believe this is part of the player and not firefox own code. I don't see how this blocks the release of 3.6.4 either when majority of people don't go to this site to view videos anyway.. If this was happening on YouTube which it isn't than I would be concerned.

Comment 16

•

15 years ago

I don't see how you can make the conclusions in comment 14 yet. First, we are not sure if it is the player's problem. Second, to users, it will appear as if 3.6.4 broke them in any case. Third, Cnet.com (which downloads.com redirects to) is #35 in Gogole's top 1000 (http://www.google.com/adplanner/static/top1000/), so the potential fallout is large (even if users don't generally view the old download video reviews). We also don't know if v.14 is older than v.2 (though likely), how many videos are using v1.4, if there are plans to update everything to v.2, if other Cnet properties are affected, if other players/sites may be affected by the same issue, etc. Until we get more information we can not gauge the severity and impact of this bug (or the negative interaction between OOPP and certain videos) and thus cannot confidently conclude this is not a blocker.

Comment 17

•

15 years ago

so therefore it could be days or weeks before we find the cause of this problem and a potential fix?

u279076

Comment 18

•

15 years ago

I think the reasoning in comment 15 is pretty sound. Why not release 3.6.4 with this bug and relnote it, giving users instructions for disabling OOPP if they run into this issue frequently?

Comment 19

•

15 years ago

(In reply to comment #18) > I think the reasoning in comment 15 is pretty sound. Why not release 3.6.4 > with this bug and relnote it, giving users instructions for disabling OOPP if > they run into this issue frequently? this sounds like a good idea to me they can just disable OOPP if they run into this problem until it is fixed in 3.6.5.

Comment 20

•

15 years ago

(In reply to comment #19) > (In reply to comment #18) > > I think the reasoning in comment 15 is pretty sound. Why not release 3.6.4 > > with this bug and relnote it, giving users instructions for disabling OOPP if > > they run into this issue frequently? > > this sounds like a good idea to me they can just disable OOPP if they run into > this problem until it is fixed in 3.6.5. This is a non-starter. Most users a) don't read the release notes b) don't even know what OOPP is c) won't know how to use/will be scared by the warning in about:config d) won't understand the problem more than "these videos used to work, now they don't for some reason, firefox sucks, it works in chome/ie/etc" There is movement happening to answer the questions we need to make an informed decision. I believe the right people at Cnet are aware and can answer some questions. We have also opened a ticket with Adobe.

Comment 21

•

15 years ago

i guess its just a wait and see than although i would like to see 3.6.4 soon because OOPP has improved firefox a lot! :)

rsx11m

Comment 22

•

15 years ago

Keep in mind that this is also delaying getting security fixes to the end user, not just for the 1.9.2 but also for the 1.9.1 branch (which has good builds up for a month now but being stalled by the OOPP feature backport for 3.6.4). So, I'm wondering what's in the end more embarrassing: Not pushing important security updates to the users in a reasonable time, or a plug-in occasionally getting stuck on specific sites because of whatever interoperability issue?

chris hofmann

Comment 23

•

15 years ago

(In reply to comment #9) > I've been trying to diagnose this, it seems similar to bug 563361. There is a > pre-roll advertisement video associated with this that seems to load, and then > shutdown. Then the video loads up. Neither the ad, or the video play. Looking > at the logs and stepping through a bit, I'm currently at a loss as to what > might be the cause. has anyone tried the test url on builds from the regression window mentioned in https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=563361#c5 to see if we can confirm if this is related or not to that bug?

Comment 24

•

15 years ago

i am in agreement with comment #22

Comment 25

•

15 years ago

release 3.6.4 as is so users get the important security updates and fixes and when there is a fix for this bug than release 3.6.5

Comment 26

•

15 years ago

(In reply to comment #22) > Keep in mind that this is also delaying getting security fixes to the end user, > not just for the 1.9.2 but also for the 1.9.1 branch (which has good builds up > for a month now but being stalled by the OOPP feature backport for 3.6.4). > > So, I'm wondering what's in the end more embarrassing: Not pushing important > security updates to the users in a reasonable time, or a plug-in occasionally > getting stuck on specific sites because of whatever interoperability issue? I'm not sure why this is a concern. 3.6.3 is the current code base, if a critical security issue came up, we could easily clone 3.6.3, apply the fix, and release. 3.6.4 could then be bumped to 3.6.5. I doubt we are holding up major security fixes for this, but maybe the drivers could comment on that. We may be holding up various fixes that have been applied to 3.6.4pre along with OOPP, but that is pretty standard practice.

rsx11m

Comment 27

•

15 years ago

Firefox 3.5.10 and SeaMonkey 2.0.5 builds have been up since May 4th, also Thunderbird 3.0.5 since May 12th. Neither is affected by the OOPP backport to the 1.9.2 branch but delayed anyway. I can't speculate which security issues may be solved by those updates as I'm not "in the loop" for those, but I'd tried to point out that good builds are unnecessarily delayed due to OOPP on a different branch. This appears unreasonable, at least for the 1.9.1-branch builds, but the delay also raises eyebrows for the current release branch.

Comment 28

•

15 years ago

(In reply to comment #27) > Firefox 3.5.10 and SeaMonkey 2.0.5 builds have been up since May 4th, also > Thunderbird 3.0.5 since May 12th. Neither is affected by the OOPP backport to > the 1.9.2 branch but delayed anyway. I can't speculate which security issues > may be solved by those updates as I'm not "in the loop" for those, but I'd > tried to point out that good builds are unnecessarily delayed due to OOPP on > a different branch. This appears unreasonable, at least for the 1.9.1-branch > builds, but the delay also raises eyebrows for the current release branch. yeah delaying 3.6.4 more and more is gonna cause users to be sketchy on upgrading to the build because they will think the delays were a result of the software being too buggy and when it is released it will have the same result.

chris hofmann

Comment 29

•

15 years ago

I'm away from my laptop most of this weekend, but here is a suggestion. we should restrict comments in this bug to getting this bug fixed, and as soon as possible on the trunk and branches. comments about when to ship 3.6.4, or not, or any other release should move to dev.planning or another forum. if someone could help out checking out comment 23 that would be great.

Comment 30

•

15 years ago

(In reply to comment #29) > I'm away from my laptop most of this weekend, but here is a suggestion. we > should restrict comments in this bug to getting this bug fixed, and as soon as > possible on the trunk and branches. > > comments about when to ship 3.6.4, or not, or any other release should move to > dev.planning or another forum. > > if someone could help out checking out comment 23 that would be great. i would help you out but i dont know what URL i am supposed to be clicking on because it lists more than one and what i am looking for..

chris hofmann

Comment 31

•

15 years ago

http://download.cnet.com/VLC-Media-Player/3000-13632_4-10267151.html?tag=mncol is the test case here I think. Regression window for 1.9.3: if video Works: http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/600a41e39ab4 Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.3a3pre) Gecko/20100311 Minefield/3.7a3pre ID:20100311005442 and Fails: http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/dc3af645f713 Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.3a3pre) Gecko/20100311 Minefield/3.7a3pre ID:2010031109530 then it's highly likely this is the same as bug 563361 and one of the sites that could be affected by that bug.

Comment 32

•

15 years ago

yeah that video did fail for me when trying it on 3.6.4.. works fine on previous builds.

Alice0775 White

Comment 33

•

15 years ago

(In reply to comment #31) It seems to be different Regression window: Works (IPC does not seems to be included in this build): Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.3a1pre) Gecko/20091214 Minefield/3.7a1pre ID:20091214045914 Fails (set dom.ipc.plugins.enabled to true) Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.3a1pre) Gecko/20091215 Minefield/3.7a1pre ID:20091215045531 Pushlog: http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/pushloghtml?fromchange=44c392db6672&tochange=96e8d529b2d3

Frank Mar

Reporter

Comment 34

•

15 years ago

> > This is a non-starter. Most users a) don't read the release notes b) don't even > know what OOPP is c) won't know how to use/will be scared by the warning in > about:config d) won't understand the problem more than "these videos used to > work, now they don't for some reason, firefox sucks, it works in chome/ie/etc" > > There is movement happening to answer the questions we need to make an informed > decision. I believe the right people at Cnet are aware and can answer some > questions. We have also opened a ticket with Adobe. Sorry I cant be much more help... yeah Im a person who will say "it doesn't work, yet it works with chrome/ie/etc" - but I would never say Firefox sucks (cause I love it). I don't know much about this coding or w/e Im not that much of a techy. Im just the person who wants to politely tell of a bug, and so someone who does know can find a solution, or inform the people who can.

Comment 35

•

15 years ago

i emailed cnet to see what the problem is with these videos and this is what they told me.. Hello, Thank you for bringing this to our attention. We have forwarded your inquiry to our CNET TV Team where they will investigate and resolve this matter internally. We appreciate your patience and apologize for any inconvenience it may have caused in the meantime. Sincerely, Pauline CNET Customer Support this makes me believe that it is not a firefox issue?

Comment 36

•

15 years ago

@mattburles@live.com >this makes me believe that it is not a firefox issue? No, this only means You probably got an automated message and the final one may be sent in even a couple of weeks or more. There is no so much time before the release. Anyway, Fx 3.6.4 gets delayed and delayed - if only OOPP is the cause of the issue, maybe it would be more reasonable to issue 3.6.4 without OOPP and 3.6.5 with it integrated in, like, a month? Or at least announce build 7.

Comment 37

•

15 years ago

All: as per comment 29, this bug is not the right place to advocate for when we ship Firefox 3.6.4, and whether or not we include OOPP in that release. I assure you that these issues are being discussed daily, and you can track that in the Delivery Meeting notes at http://wiki.mozilla.org/DeliveryMeetings Alice: thanks for checking the regression ranges. Matt: we're already in contact with CNet and Adobe, as per comment 20, but thanks for your efforts. Please only add new information to this bug report, thanks, everyone!

Comment 38

•

15 years ago

@Mike Beltzner URL You provided seems not correct: "There is currently no text in this page. You can search for this page title in other pages, search the related logs, or edit this page."

Comment 39

•

15 years ago

Sorry - http://wiki.mozilla.org/Firefox/DeliveryMeetings

Comment 40

•

15 years ago

(In reply to comment #33) > Pushlog: > http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/pushloghtml?fromchange=44c392db6672&tochange=96e8d529b2d3 I narrowed it down a little (on Linux x86_64): http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/pushloghtml?fromchange=a732c6d3c078&tochange=cac067156b24 In 84b7c31ce666 it works, in cac067156b24 (with dom.ipc.plugins.enabled set to true) - it doesn't. Builds from 999714b20f33 up to 05ac28100696 (probably a wider range, I didn't check all of them) hangs with dom.ipc.plugins.enabled set to true with an output: [PluginModuleParent] LoadModule vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv ----> FAILED TO exec() CHILD PROCESS <--- ----> path: / ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ** (firefox-bin:473): WARNING **: Serious fd usage error 17 ** (firefox-bin:473): WARNING **: Serious fd usage error 14

Comment 41

•

15 years ago

what does this mean?

Updated

•

15 years ago

Whiteboard: [bugday0601] → [bugday0601][oopp-watchlist]

Comment 42

•

15 years ago

I guess sb should remove the blocking flag for 1.9.2.4, as You issued Fx 3.6.4 a moment ago.

Updated

•

15 years ago

blocking1.9.2: .4+ → needed

(mostly gone) XtC4UaLL [:xtc4uall]

Comment 43

•

15 years ago

Why is it written in release notes that this is an issue only under Windows? Linux suffers from this, too.

Cole Navarro

Comment 44

•

15 years ago

the latest version of firefox 3.6.8 the flash player always crashed when a video start to load its works fine in youtube.com but the others site like http://veoh.com, http://onepieceofbleach.com and http://anime44.com its not loading its always flash player crash then i disable the crashed protection then try again if its works but firefox is not responding my flash player version is 10.1.53.64 please fix problem

[not reading bugmail]

Comment 45

•

15 years ago

(In reply to comment #44) > the latest version of firefox 3.6.8 the flash player always crashed when a > video start to load its works fine in youtube.com but the others site like > http://veoh.com, http://onepieceofbleach.com and http://anime44.com its not > loading its always flash player crash then i disable the crashed protection > then try again if its works but firefox is not responding my flash player > version is 10.1.53.64 > please fix problem Not related to this bug. File a new bug please.

Hiram J. Perez

Comment 46

•

14 years ago

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; es-ES; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101203 Firefox/3.6.13 Currently working the old player videos with IPC plugins enabled

Comment 47

•

14 years ago

At least on the given example Url CNet now uses "CNET TV 3 Gecko v1.1c" as Player. Given that, this is WFM on http://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-1.9.2/rev/fc19169f304d Build http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/51702867d932 using Flash 10.2.152.26. => Resolving WFM?

Alice0775 White

Comment 48

•

14 years ago

WFM2 http://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-1.9.2/rev/ed0b2e310c16 Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.15pre) Gecko/20110213 Namoroka/3.6.15pre ID:20110213033206 http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/51702867d932 Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:2.0b12pre) Gecko/20110213 Firefox/4.0b12pre ID:20110213030344