Closed Bug 999284 Opened 7 years ago Closed 7 years ago
.0 printing blank page instead of PDF
User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:29.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/29.0 (Beta/Release) Build ID: 20140417185217 Steps to reproduce: On my Windows 8.1 machine I opened several one page PDFs directly in Firefox 29.0 - using Firefox's PF viewer, not an add-on and not a 3rd party program (i.e. Adobe Reader). Actual results: The PDFs displayed correctly, and saved correctly as I verified later, but would repeatedly only print a completely blank page even after going back to the original site and re-opening them several times. After saving the files and opening them in Adobe Acrobat, they printed just fine. Expected results: The PDF files should have printed directly from Firefox without any issues.
(a) I used both the printer icon on the upper right hand side of the PDF viewer UI, and the File -> Print command. (b) I linked to just one of the files that would not print, but as far as I can tell no PDFs will print on this system. (c) Thank you!
Status: UNCONFIRMED → NEW
Component: Untriaged → PDF Viewer
Ever confirmed: true
User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:29.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/29.0 Build ID: 20140421221237 Confirmed on Windows 7 SP1 x64 using Firefox 29's built-in PDF reader on another web site. Can't give a URL as it's for internal use, but the symptoms are the same. The OP's linked PDF is also blank on this system. PDF printing worked with Firefox 28.0.
Priority: -- → P3
this issue is also quite widespread in the sumo forums a day after the general release of 29: https://support.mozilla.org/questions/996487 https://support.mozilla.org/questions/997170 https://support.mozilla.org/questions/997325 https://support.mozilla.org/questions/997435
I just had a chat with a user who tested this in a new profile and still had a blank page when printing PDF's. Printing from Adobe works just fine. Let's get this on the radar for a possible 29.0.1 as this looks bad.
I guess it is a regression of 29 and 30 & 31 are also affected. Anyway, tracking on the advice of Tyler.
dup of 1003707 ?
Sylvestre, is 31 and 32 really affected or it's just an assumption based on 29 and 30 regression?
It was just an assumption. Sorry, I jumped to quickly on this bug.
Making it a duplicate of bug 1003707 based on comment 2 and similarity in STR. Also the latter has regression window specified.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 7 years ago
Resolution: --- → DUPLICATE
Duplicate of bug: 1003707
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.