603212 - Minefield does not draw Comments on Yahoo! Japan News page

Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 601733

(Core :: JavaScript Engine, defect)

Description

[Alice0775 White]

Build Identifier: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:2.0b4pre) Gecko/20100814 Minefield/4.0b4pre ID:20100814040443

Minefield does not draw Comments on Yahoo! Japan News page

Error: Could not convert JavaScript argument arg 0 [nsIDOMHTMLDivElement.appendChild] = NS_ERROR_XPC_BAD_CONVERT_JS
Source file: http://i.yimg.jp/lib/news/jquery/jquery.js
Line: 11

Reproducible: Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Start Minefield with new profile
2. Open URL ( http://headlines.yahoo.co.jp/hl?a=20101010-00000002-oric-ent , not a permanent address )


Actual Results:
 Minefield does not draw Comments

Expected Results:
 should draw,

Comment 1

[Alice0775 White]

Attachment: screenshot

Comment 2

[Alice0775 White]

Regression window for m-c:
Works:
http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/d31c87f6d202
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.12pre) Gecko/20101009 Minefield/3.7a4pre ID:20100405112410
Fails:
http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/17e554c5087c
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.12pre) Gecko/20101009 Minefield/3.7a4pre ID:20100405154634
Pushlog:
http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/pushloghtml?fromchange=d31c87f6d202&tochange=17e554c5087c

Comment 3

[Alice0775 White]

Regression window for Tracemonkey build:
Works;
http://hg.mozilla.org/tracemonkey/rev/181ef94693d5
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.12pre) Gecko/20101009 Minefield/3.7a3pre ID:20100329043342
Fails:
http://hg.mozilla.org/tracemonkey/rev/bf9c4630fa38
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.12pre) Gecko/20101009 Minefield/3.7a3pre ID:20100330043128
Pushlog
http://hg.mozilla.org/tracemonkey/pushloghtml?fromchange=181ef94693d5&tochange=bf9c4630fa38

Comment 5

[Brendan Eich [:brendan]]

(In reply to comment #4)
> 
> *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 597816 ***

That bug was dup'ed to bug 601733. Any reason not to do the same here?

/be

Comment 6

[Alice0775 White]

(In reply to comment #5)
> (In reply to comment #4)
> > 
> > *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 597816 ***
> 
> That bug was dup'ed to bug 601733. Any reason not to do the same here?
> 
> /be

Nothing.