Closed
Bug 601267
Opened 15 years ago
Closed 15 years ago
xpcshell tests fail in qt builds, work in gtk ones
Categories
(Core :: IPC, defect)
Tracking
()
RESOLVED
FIXED
Tracking | Status | |
---|---|---|
fennec | 2.0+ | --- |
People
(Reporter: azakai, Assigned: dougt)
References
Details
Attachments
(2 files, 1 obsolete file)
3.10 KB,
application/javascript
|
Details | |
1.30 KB,
patch
|
cjones
:
review+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
In ContentChild::Init, the X11 error handler is set up. Different code is run in GTK or Qt builds on Fennec. The Qt path fails with
ASSERTION: No X display: 'display'
GTK builds run fine.
Reporter | ||
Updated•15 years ago
|
tracking-fennec: --- → ?
Reporter | ||
Comment 1•15 years ago
|
||
Assignee | ||
Comment 3•15 years ago
|
||
alone, what was the error message again? Are we just asserting here:
http://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/toolkit/xre/nsX11ErrorHandler.cpp#201
This is a known symptom of bug 598884.
Reporter | ||
Comment 5•15 years ago
|
||
(In reply to comment #3)
> alone, what was the error message again? Are we just asserting here:
>
> http://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/toolkit/xre/nsX11ErrorHandler.cpp#201
Yes, that is what we hit.
Assignee | ||
Updated•15 years ago
|
Assignee: nobody → doug.turner
tracking-fennec: ? → 2.0+
Assignee | ||
Comment 6•15 years ago
|
||
Attachment #481894 -
Flags: review?(jones.chris.g)
Assignee | ||
Comment 7•15 years ago
|
||
ignore @@ -68,16 +72,19 @@, and the extra ws in @@ -183,16 +190,22 @@
Comment on attachment 481894 [details] [diff] [review]
patch v.1
(In reply to comment #7)
> ignore @@ -68,16 +72,19 @@, and the extra ws in @@ -183,16 +190,22 @@
That makes for unhappy reviewer.
>diff --git a/gfx/src/X11Util.h b/gfx/src/X11Util.h
>--- a/gfx/src/X11Util.h
>+++ b/gfx/src/X11Util.h
>@@ -58,21 +58,24 @@
> namespace mozilla {
>
> /**
> * Return the default X Display created and used by the UI toolkit.
> */
> inline Display*
> DefaultXDisplay()
> {
>+ Display* display = NULL;
> #if defined(MOZ_WIDGET_GTK2)
>- return GDK_DISPLAY();
>+ display = GDK_DISPLAY();
> #elif defined(MOZ_WIDGET_QT)
>- return QX11Info::display();
>+ display = QX11Info::display();
> #endif
>+ NS_ASSERTION(display, "No X display");
>+ return display;
I don't understand this change. Clients should be allowed to check |if (DefaultXDisplay())| without triggering an assertion.
Attachment #481894 -
Flags: review?(jones.chris.g)
Assignee | ||
Comment 9•15 years ago
|
||
> I don't understand this change. Clients should be allowed to check |if
(DefaultXDisplay())| without triggering an assertion.
Why would you ever have a null display other than in an error condition?
Headless environment. Either way, code that assumes DefaultXDisplay() will crash anyway, this assertion doesn't help anyone, just adds more code.
Assignee | ||
Comment 11•15 years ago
|
||
Attachment #481894 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #481935 -
Flags: review?(jones.chris.g)
Updated•15 years ago
|
Attachment #481935 -
Flags: review?(jones.chris.g) → review+
Assignee | ||
Comment 12•15 years ago
|
||
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 15 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•