Closed
Bug 692072
Opened 13 years ago
Closed 13 years ago
mailto link doesn't submit target address or other data
Categories
(SeaMonkey :: MailNews: Composition, defect)
Tracking
(seamonkey2.5 unaffected, seamonkey2.6 affected, seamonkey2.7+ fixed)
RESOLVED
DUPLICATE
of bug 691288
Tracking | Status | |
---|---|---|
seamonkey2.5 | --- | unaffected |
seamonkey2.6 | --- | affected |
seamonkey2.7 | + | fixed |
People
(Reporter: moz, Unassigned)
Details
(Keywords: regression)
Attachments
(3 files)
User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:9.0a2) Gecko/20111004 Firefox/9.0a2 SeaMonkey/2.6a2 Build ID: 20111004013008 Steps to reproduce: Follow link with mailto-Protocol and ?subject parameter Actual results: SeaMonkey Mail-Compose-Window without to-Adress or subject is openend Expected results: Mail-Compose-Window should be prefilled with adress and subject from mailto-Link
Comment 1•13 years ago
|
||
The error window is hafi@i5 ~ $ fenster 1109270526-1109280615 2011-09-26 20:26:00 PDT 2011-09-27 21:15:00 PDT Test case at bottom of <http://sujag.de/kontakt.php>
Comment 2•13 years ago
|
||
Please provide a minimized test case. Thanks.
Reporter | ||
Comment 3•13 years ago
|
||
Every poster name on this bug page can be used as a testcase. These are mailto-Links that should result in a Mail-Compose-Window with prefilled to-Field
Comment 4•13 years ago
|
||
In reply to comment #2
Comment 5•13 years ago
|
||
This is working for me, with SeaMonkey 2.5 Beta 1, both from external programs [Firefox] and with internal SeaMonkey browser. I'm getting To: filled in and Subject filled with "Question" Sue can you possibly try with addons disabled?
Comment 6•13 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Justin Wood (:Callek) from comment #5) > This is working for me, with SeaMonkey 2.5 Beta 1, both from external > programs [Firefox] and with internal SeaMonkey browser. Which build date? Have you considered the above mentioned error window? > I'm getting To: filled in and Subject filled with "Question" So it is with SMs older than 2011-09-26 20:26:00 PDT ;) > Sue can you possibly try with addons disabled? safe-mode makes no difference
Comment 7•13 years ago
|
||
I see this bug with recent tinderbox builds also. Even with a new profile. No messages in the error console.
Comment 8•13 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Hartmut Figge from comment #6) > (In reply to Justin Wood (:Callek) from comment #5) > > > This is working for me, with SeaMonkey 2.5 Beta 1, both from external > > programs [Firefox] and with internal SeaMonkey browser. > > Which build date? Have you considered the above mentioned error window? Build date doesn't matter for me, I'm on the *official* 2.5 Beta 1 when I tested. I also do not get an error window. > > I'm getting To: filled in and Subject filled with "Question" > > So it is with SMs older than 2011-09-26 20:26:00 PDT ;) If you in-fact tested on SM 2.6a2 then its actually newer than 2.5 Beta 1, regardless of build date. > > Sue can you possibly try with addons disabled? > > safe-mode makes no difference I also tested on win7, fwiw. Not linux64. CC-ing someone who can probably assist more here (in terms of testing).
Comment 9•13 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Justin Wood (:Callek) from comment #8) > If you in-fact tested on SM 2.6a2 then its actually newer than 2.5 Beta 1, > regardless of build date. I am building my own SMs nearly daily and can easily test older builds in my archive in which the folders are automatically named after the build date. Currently i am using SM 2.7a1. Releases? No interest. ;)
Reporter | ||
Comment 10•13 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Justin Wood (:Callek) from comment #8) > If you in-fact tested on SM 2.6a2 then its actually newer than 2.5 Beta 1, > regardless of build date. It's definitively 2.6a2 autoupdated via aurora update channel
Comment 11•13 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Hartmut Figge from comment #9) > (In reply to Justin Wood (:Callek) from comment #8) > > > If you in-fact tested on SM 2.6a2 then its actually newer than 2.5 Beta 1, > > regardless of build date. > > I am building my own SMs nearly daily and can easily test older builds in my > archive in which the folders are automatically named after the build date. > Currently i am using SM 2.7a1. > In that case, would you be willing to "regression-hunt" this down for me/us. What I want is: First Broken Build: <> Last Good Build: <> Where good is "Cannot reproduce this bug". Getting the range down to as close to a 24 hour period as possible. And noting the cset as per about:buildconfig, and buildid per about:support.
Comment 12•13 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Justin Wood (:Callek) from comment #11) > In that case, would you be willing to "regression-hunt" this down for me/us. Hm, i have already given this information in comment #1. > What I want is: > > First Broken Build: <> 2011-09-27 21:15:00 PDT > Last Good Build: <> 2011-09-26 20:26:00 PDT > Where good is "Cannot reproduce this bug". Getting the range down to as > close to a 24 hour period as possible. Almost 24 hours. > And noting the cset as perabout:buildconfig, and buildid per about:support. Not neccessary. The build dates are automatically transferred to the names of the folders by my build script. ;) Because these dates are in CET/CEST, they must be translated to PDT. This is done by another script with the name fenster.
Comment 13•13 years ago
|
||
Confirmed, regression. WFM in 2.4.1 WFM in Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:9.0a1) Gecko/20110920 Firefox/9.0a1 SeaMonkey/2.6a1 Broken in Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:9.0a2) Gecko/20111004 Firefox/9.0a2 SeaMonkey/2.6a2 Nothing in Error Console that I see.
Comment 14•13 years ago
|
||
I just realized from external applications (Firefox) the bug does not appear for me only from inside SeaMonkey 2.7a1.
Comment 15•13 years ago
|
||
In reply to comment #11
Comment 16•13 years ago
|
||
In reply to comment #11 Too little coffee. d&r
Comment 17•13 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Justin Wood (:Callek) from comment #8) [...] > I also tested on win7, fwiw. Not linux64. CC-ing someone who can probably > assist more here (in terms of testing). Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:10.0a1) Gecko/20111005 Firefox/10.0a1 SeaMonkey/2.7a1 ID:20111005003004 Reproducible: Always I reproduce the bug on this Mozilla-built nightly: clicking on the link in the attachment opens an email-compose window with empty "To:" and "Subject:" fields. The "From:" drop-down is set at my default mail account and identity.
Status: UNCONFIRMED → NEW
status-seamonkey2.5:
--- → unaffected
status-seamonkey2.6:
--- → affected
status-seamonkey2.7:
--- → affected
Component: General → MailNews: Composition
Ever confirmed: true
Keywords: regression
QA Contact: general → mailnews-composition
Comment 18•13 years ago
|
||
Wayne: does this bug also happen on Thunderbird 9.0a2 or later?
Comment 19•13 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Hartmut Figge from comment #12) > (In reply to Justin Wood (:Callek) from comment #11) > > > In that case, would you be willing to "regression-hunt" this down for me/us. > > Hm, i have already given this information in comment #1. > > > What I want is: > > > > First Broken Build: <> > > 2011-09-27 21:15:00 PDT > > > Last Good Build: <> > > 2011-09-26 20:26:00 PDT > Ok, that is helpful, but nothing in c-c sticks out at me: http://hg.mozilla.org/comm-central/pushloghtml?startdate=2011-09-25&enddate=2011-09-27 > > Where good is "Cannot reproduce this bug". Getting the range down to as > > close to a 24 hour period as possible. > > Almost 24 hours. > > > And noting the cset as perabout:buildconfig, and buildid per about:support. > > Not neccessary. The build dates are automatically transferred to the names > of the folders by my build script. ;) Yes it is necessary, I want the csets! That is what I can use to translate your build dates to a real regression range., otherwise there is quite a big gap in what this could be, especially when talking about mozilla-based changes.
tracking-seamonkey2.7:
--- → +
Keywords: regressionwindow-wanted
Comment 20•13 years ago
|
||
The build ID (source datestamp to the second) is not found in about:support; it could be displayed by the Nightlmy Tester Tools extension but I don't know how precise it would be for an own-built executable. The Mercurial comm-central and mozilla-central changesets from which the "last good" and the "first bad" executables were built are, as Callek said, the only way to know precisely where the limits are between sources "known to be good", "undecided" and "known to be bad". If you have kept the logs from the last "python client.py checkout" before building, they are displayed as "Updated to revision xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx." where the x's are hex digits, immediately after invoking hg update for mozilla-central and comm-central. There are similar lines lower down for ChatZilla, Dom Inspector, the LDAP SDK and Venkman but this particular bug doesn't sound like it might result from a bug in any of the latter four. The mozilla-central changeset is normally also displayed near the top of about:buildconfig; I don't know why yours (which seems to be from a 32-bit build) doesn't show it. Here are the first few lines of about:buildconfig for the build whose user-agent and build ID are mentioned in comment #17; I obtained them by copy and paste: about:buildconfig Source Built from http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/70e4de45a0d0 Build platform target x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
Comment 21•13 years ago
|
||
After widening the search window a little, I see several mailnews changesets, but I'm not competent to say which ones might or might not be relevant. David, can you help? Here is the URL I used: http://hg.mozilla.org/comm-central/pushloghtml?startdate=2011-09-25&enddate=2011-09-28
Reporter | ||
Comment 22•13 years ago
|
||
I tested with some nightlies from the FTP Server good: Build identifier: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:9.0a1) Gecko/20110926 Firefox/9.0a1 SeaMonkey/2.6a1 Source Built from http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/c722928d8b69 bad: Build identifier: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:9.0a1) Gecko/20110927 Firefox/9.0a1 SeaMonkey/2.6a1 Source Built from http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/803b01dcc589 is that the info you need?
Comment 23•13 years ago
|
||
You might have to broaden the change sets to include mozilla-central. But isn't this a dup of bug 691288, which has a fix up for review?
Comment 24•13 years ago
|
||
(In reply to David :Bienvenu from comment #23) > You might have to broaden the change sets to include mozilla-central. But > isn't this a dup of bug 691288, which has a fix up for review? Applying this fix solves the problem here.
Updated•13 years ago
|
Updated•9 years ago
|
Keywords: regressionwindow-wanted
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•