Bug 704102

Summary: The "Open Containing Folder" menu item in the download box popup menu does not open the folder by dolphin or Konqueror but by nautilus in KDE.
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Hong Xu <hong>
Component: firefoxAssignee: Gecko Maintainer <gecko-bugs-nobody>
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: unspecified    
Version: 14CC: gecko-bugs-nobody, mcepl
Target Milestone: ---Keywords: Reopened
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: x86_64   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2011-05-15 20:18:57 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:

Description Hong Xu 2011-05-12 07:40:28 UTC 
Description of problem:
The "Open Containing Folder" menu item in the download box popup menu does not open the folder by dolphin or Konqueror but by nautilus in KDE.

How reproducible:
Every time.

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Start KDE and download something in firefox;
2. Open the download box;
3. Right click on the item you just downloaded, and click the "Open Containing Folder".
  
Actual results:
The folder is open by nautilus.

Expected results:
The folder is open by dolphin or Konqueror.

Additional Info:
Both KDE and GNOME are installed on my system.
Comment 1 Matěj Cepl 2011-05-14 18:11:41 UTC 

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 699053 ***
Comment 2 Matěj Cepl 2011-05-14 18:12:51 UTC 
Sorry, this is probably mistake. What version of firefox you have (rpm -q firefox would tell you), please?

Thank you
Comment 3 Hong Xu 2011-05-15 05:38:22 UTC 
(In reply to comment #2)
> Sorry, this is probably mistake. What version of firefox you have (rpm -q
> firefox would tell you), please?

firefox version is: firefox-3.6.17-1.fc14.x86_64
Comment 4 Matěj Cepl 2011-05-15 20:18:57 UTC 
Yes, I am afraid it is a duplicate and something which needs to be resolved upstream.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 699053 ***