Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 1333904
Subscription-manager-gui's combo "Service level preferences" does not change it's name if some value is choosen from AT-SPI perspective
Last modified: 2016-11-03 16:28:42 EDT
Description of problem: Desktop acceptance tests of Subscription Manager cannot get a value of an actual selected item of a combo box. It is due to a fact that combo does not change its name to an actual selected item value. The combo is in a subscription-manager-gui - "System" / "Preferences" / "Service level preference". I have added an example from orca source repo. I hope it helps. - a combo has handler for "changed" event https://github.com/GNOME/orca/blob/master/src/orca/orca-setup.ui#L1162 - the handler sets a name of the combo each time some value is selected https://github.com/GNOME/orca/blob/master/src/orca/orca_gui_prefs.py#L2080 BTW: this is an improvement that helps desktop acceptance tests that work with this combo. Steps to Reproduce: Given I open sniff (from dogtail package) and I start subscription-manager-gui and I open a dialog "System" / "Preferences" in subscription-manager-gui and I find a combo "sla_selection_combobox" in sniff When I select a value "Basic" Then I still see that name of the combo is equal to a value "sla_selection_combobox" in sniff. It should be set to something similar to: "sla_selection_combobox|Basic" or "Basic". Actual results: Name of combo is "sla_selection_combobox" no mather what value is selected. Expected results: It should be set to something similar to: "sla_selection_combobox|Basic" or "Basic" (if value "Basic" is selected). Additional info:
PR filed https://github.com/candlepin/subscription-manager/pull/1445
master commit c786fb488bc85158ffbc44934b2bef1782647f1f
Hello I'll write a small test for this. It is better to have a small test just for this although this feature is used in various tests.
It works. Thanks.
Since the problem described in this bug report should be resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated files, follow the link below. If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report. https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-2592.html