Closed Bug 575559 Opened 9 years ago Closed 9 years ago

Remove nsAddonsRepository.js on update

Categories

(Toolkit :: Add-ons Manager, defect)

x86
All
defect
Not set

Tracking

()

VERIFIED FIXED
mozilla2.0b1
Tracking Status
blocking2.0 --- beta1+

People

(Reporter: nthomas, Assigned: bparr)

References

Details

(Whiteboard: [AddonsRewrite])

Attachments

(1 file)

bug 568728 moved nsAddonsRepository.js to AddonRepository.jsm, and updated package-manifest.in but not removed-files.in. Anyone updating to 4.0b1 using a complete update (eg from 3.7a4 & older, or the partial fails from 3.7a5) will end up with both copies of the file. 

Simple enough fix to http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/file/default/browser/installer/removed-files.in, but we need to know if this blocks 4.0b1.
I think it does - ending up with both files here would be pretty bad, I think.
Attached patch PatchSplinter Review
Add components/nsAddonRepository.js to removed-files.in

In terms of the Addon Repository code, and the code using it, I can't think of a way where having both files would break things; nsAddonRepository.js would just not be used anywhere. However, I am not entirely sure if there is another way having both files breaks things. So, hopefully the patch can land for beta1.
Dave Townsend will be able to set us straight here. This isn't user data, right, this is just our code?
blocking2.0: ? → beta1+
I'm pretty sure beta1 would be good without this, nightly users haven't complained about any problems either, from what I heard. We had the same bug in SeaMonkey, we probably will take it as ride-along in build2 of our 2.1a2, I guess it might be best for Firefox to also consider it not actually blocking, i.e. triggering a respin, but good for a ride-along if a build2 is needed. :)
(In reply to comment #1)
> I think it does - ending up with both files here would be pretty bad, I think.

Actually, I guess the component whitelist is probably saving us here.
Comment on attachment 454818 [details] [diff] [review]
Patch

There is actually no problem with having both of these files present, they should not conflict with each other and at least in Firefox neither is actually in use right now.
Attachment #454818 - Flags: review+
Assignee: nobody → bparr
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
Whiteboard: [AddonsRewrite]
Thanks for jumping on this Ben.

Landed on trunk: http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/195e0f1d0bf1
Landed on relbranch: http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/724856797907
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 9 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Target Milestone: --- → mozilla1.9.3b1
Verified fixed with Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:2.0b1) Gecko/20100630 Firefox/4.0b1
Status: RESOLVED → VERIFIED
Flags: in-testsuite-
Flags: in-litmus-
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.