666 bytes, text/plain
2.53 KB, patch
|Details | Diff | Splinter Review|
33.54 KB, patch
|Details | Diff | Splinter Review|
518 bytes, text/plain
Changesets to backout: Bug 722325 https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/a8b8c4489e4e Bug 722117 https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/a5569fc4c390 Bug 719177 https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/2cae7e5c62ae https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/07bd73451aa4 https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/13739446fc8e https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/0246973f2513 https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/f222fbece983 https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/8f11aaac24dc Part 4 (outline) in bug 524925 https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/73eaf1199ff0
Additional fixes on top of the backout, as requested in bug 723669.
Try results pending: https://tbpl.mozilla.org/?tree=Try&rev=fa1a77db5788
Is this something we think we can reinstate later, or is there some fundamental issue with it?
We can reinstate most of it, see bug 723669.
Comment on attachment 594602 [details] [diff] [review] additional fixes Review of attachment 594602 [details] [diff] [review]: ----------------------------------------------------------------- Should we remove nsChangeHint_UpdateTransformLayer and nsChangeHint_UpdateOpacityLayer too? I think we should! It seems to me they currently have the same bug.
Please file a new bug. This bug is only for making UpdateOverflow work for transforms and nothing else. The aim is to merge this to Aurora and leave it at that state for Fx12. Then re-land bug 719177 with some additional fixes (as discussed in bug 723669) on trunk, except for 'text-shadow' which we can handle in bug 723669 (if we decide to do it).
The Try run was green. I installed the Try build on my Nexus and it seems to work fine on sites mentioned in bug 722325, but I'm not exactly sure what to look for. Chris, I'd appreciate if you can verify that. https://email@example.com/
Feel free to review this patch, or the backout commands + additional fixes patch, whichever you think is easier to review.
(In reply to Mats Palmgren [:mats] from comment #6) > Please file a new bug. Sure, filed bug 724502. I'll try to fix it.
Attachment #594602 - Flags: review+
r+ on the patch and backout
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/8d25faacb769 https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/f7ca5d73bbdd https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/cffa39f708c0 https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/66458f5036df https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/43251fa50e35 https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/9237d0cacba5 https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/14e550268f98 https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/4eda0eecbb95 https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/8f1b1574e4b0
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 10 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Target Milestone: --- → mozilla13
This caused bug 722325 to regress again, so I re-instated that wallpaper and filed bug 725664 to fix it for real. The question is - what do we want to do for Aurora? Ship with the wallpaper or revert UpdateOverflow also for transforms?
Ok, here's the backout commands for Aurora. Specifically, I'm NOT backing out the wallpaper for bug 722325, which landed independently for Aurora in https://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-aurora/rev/73f3d8eeb937 On top of that, the same "additional fixes" patch. These changes will make the affected code the same as currently on trunk.
Comment on attachment 596226 [details] backout for Aurora [Approval Request Comment] Regression caused by (bug #): 722117, 719177, 524925 (part 4) User impact if declined: content rendering errors Testing completed (on m-c, etc.): baked on trunk for a few days, pass reftests in local Aurora build on Linux, Try results pending: https://tbpl.mozilla.org/?tree=Try&rev=40d3b4e37a0e Risk to taking this patch (and alternatives if risky): low since it mostly reverts changes from the mentioned bugs String changes made by this patch: none
Attachment #596226 - Flags: approval-mozilla-aurora?
Comment on attachment 596226 [details] backout for Aurora [Triage Comment] Approving these backouts for Aurora 12 given the content rendering regressions.
Attachment #596226 - Flags: approval-mozilla-aurora? → approval-mozilla-aurora+
https://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-aurora/rev/95b5009ae49f https://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-aurora/rev/76e53f59457f https://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-aurora/rev/00c7793f0770 https://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-aurora/rev/1444f8427e81 https://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-aurora/rev/58710da82f8f https://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-aurora/rev/c5fce77e6f19 https://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-aurora/rev/19788bc83248
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.