Description of problem: If I try to print the selected page fragment, then the printout misses the text. The images and everything are there, but the text is missing. Printing the entire page works fine - only printing selected have that problem. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): firefox-1.5.0.9-1.fc6 How reproducible: always Steps to Reproduce: 1. Mark the part of the web page, including the text 2. Try to print the selected fragment Actual results: Printout misses the text Expected results: Text is printed Additional info:
Can you please check the updated version (firefox-1.5.0.10)?
Created attachment 152584 [details] tried to print selected text > Can you please check the updated version (firefox-1.5.0.10)? Done. The results are in this attachment. I marked and printed the initial message of that report.
taking the bug
Fedora Core 6 is no longer supported, could you please reproduce this with the updated version of the currently supported distribution (Fedora 7, 8, or Rawhide)? If this issue turns out to still be reproducible, please let us know in this bug report. If after a month's time we have not heard back from you, we will have to close this bug as CANTFIX. Setting status to NEEDINFO, and awaiting information from the reporter. [This is mass-filed message to all open Fedora Core 6 bugs related to Xorg or Gecko. If you see any other reason, why this bug shouldn't be closed, please, comment on it here.]
> Fedora Core 6 is no longer supported, could you please reproduce this with the > updated version of the currently supported distribution (Fedora 7, 8, or > Rawhide)? In the bottom you can see that: Bug 221336 blocks 390181 The answer is all there, in 390181. Perhaps this bug can now be closed as a duplicate, but it looks to be more viable as it got ASSIGNED.
*** Bug 390181 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
The fact that this bug is blocked by other is just by virtue of bug 390181 was created as a clone of this bug. They are identical (now the other is closed as it doesn't serve any viable purpose anyway). So, asking once more. Could you reproduce this bug with the latest updated version of firefox 2.0* which is part of your distribution (F7, F8, or Rawhide)? If yes, could you send us please URL of the webpage, which you cannot print? The name of the game is "reproducible". Unless we are able to reproduce this bug here, there is not much we can do about it. So we need as much information as possible to able to reproduce the behavior you describe. Could you find out anything special or non-standard about your computer, printer, software, or whatever, which would help us to make firefox fail for us in the same manner as it does for you?
> So, asking once more. Could you reproduce this bug with the latest updated > version of firefox 2.0* which is part of your distribution (F7, F8, or > Rawhide)? What I did mean when referring to the bug 390181, is that this bug is still valid for f8. After all, bug 390181 was created to show exactly that: the problem is still there. But if you want to know whether or not I myself still can reproduce it - yes I can (in F7 and F8). > If yes, could you send us please URL of the webpage, which you cannot print? Same as in FC6 - any page. Let me attach the printout of the top of this bug page and see it yourself. > Unless we are able to reproduce this bug > here, there is not much we can do about it. But I thought jwrigley being able to reproduce it (bug 390181 was opened by him), is already enough. ;) > Could you find out > anything special or non-standard about your computer, printer, software, or > whatever, which would help us to make firefox fail for us in the same manner > as it does for you? I tried it on 2 completely different computers, and its all the same. Printer can be bypassed by printing into a file - its still the same. jwrigley also reproduced it (redhat.com, not some random user!), so I dont think there is something special involved.
Created attachment 284141 [details] printout of this bug page Made in F8, firefox-2.0.0.8-2.fc8
We found that this bug has been already registered in the upstream database (https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=204435) and believe that it is more appropriate to let it be resolved upstream. Red Hat will continue to track the issue in the centralized upstream bug tracker, and will review any bug fixes that become available for consideration in future updates. Thank you for the bug report.
> We found that this bug has been already registered in the upstream database > (https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=204435) Are you sure of that? The aforementioned report is about some problems with print preview and looks completely unrelated. What makes you think it is the same? I tempt to reopen this.
I would add that, in my opinion, that upstream bug is not the same one. I did state in my initial report that I can NOT reproduce this (printing selected fragment) bug in upstream firefox. This is not the same bug. I am reopening it. (btw, my redhat.com address doesn't mean I am a developer)
(In reply to comment #7) > The fact that this bug is blocked by other is just by virtue of bug 390181 was > created as a clone of this bug. They are identical (now the other is closed as > it doesn't serve any viable purpose anyway). > > So, asking once more. Could you reproduce this bug with the latest updated > version of firefox 2.0* which is part of your distribution (F7, F8, or Rawhide)? > If yes, could you send us please URL of the webpage, which you cannot print? The > name of the game is "reproducible". Unless we are able to reproduce this bug > here, there is not much we can do about it. So we need as much information as > possible to able to reproduce the behavior you describe. Could you find out > anything special or non-standard about your computer, printer, software, or > whatever, which would help us to make firefox fail for us in the same manner as > it does for you? I have this same problem. In three different computers and 2 printers and different occurs this: I can not print a selection of text in Firefox. Firefox 2.0.0.10 Fedora 8 PS.: Excuse my poor English.
Stas?
(In reply to comment #14) > Stas? What? Still the same with firefox-2.0.0.10-3.fc8 What info do you need?
(In reply to comment #15) > (In reply to comment #14) > > Stas? > What? > Still the same with firefox-2.0.0.10-3.fc8 > What info do you need? The text is not currently being printed, when landmark selection in the "print" of firefox. How to print a selection containing text using firefox-2.0.0.10-3.fc8? How to fix this problem? Thanks!
> How to print a selection containing text using firefox-2.0.0.10-3.fc8? > How to fix this problem? It was mentioned here that the upstream have this already fixed. firefox-2.0.0.10-3.fc8 have this bug still in.
This bug has not been corrected?
At this point, we're going to only be taking security fixes and major stability fixes into this release of Fedora. However, we still want to ensure the bug is fixed in the next version. We'd appreciate if you could test Firefox 3, available at http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/all-beta.html or now shipping as the default in Fedora rawhide and provide feedback as to whether it still exists so we can file a ticket upstream to try to fix it in Firefox 3 before it is released.
Sorry, I am not taking issue with Firefox 2 provided by Mozilla. The problem occurs only with Firefox packaged in Fedora 8. So install the packaged by Mozilla Firefox 3 will not change the problem.
This bug is reproducable with the upstream binary of Firefox 3beta3, so I filed it in the upstream database (https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=419037) and believe that it is more appropriate to let it be resolved upstream. Red Hat will continue to track the issue in the centralized upstream bug tracker, and will review any bug fixes that become available for consideration in future updates. Thank you for the bug report.
> At this point, we're going to only be taking security fixes and major stability > fixes into this release of Fedora. Just to clarify: are you speaking about Fedora 8? This looks a bit strange given that this is the last version released to that day, and you can't expect everyone to go for RAWHIDE to get their obvious problems solved. > This bug is reproducable with the upstream binary of Firefox 3beta3, so I filed > it in the upstream database > (https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=419037) and believe that it is > more appropriate to let it be resolved upstream. No, sorry, IMHO this is clearly wrong. Firstly, this bug is filled against Fedora 8. For Fedora 8 it is _not_ an upstream bug. This was discussed already. The bug is local and therefore, at least as long as the Fedora 8 is concerned, it can't be resolved as UPSTREAM. Secondly, you reproduced a slightly different bug, which is not even here in Fedora 8 at all. So, to put it straight, it is another bug in a completely different firefox branch. This bug cannot be closed only because the other one is present somewhere in a different branch of upstream. What's the use of always closing this bug? Why does it upset you that much? :) You can of course always resolve it as WONTFIX, or you can use NEXTRELEASE at some point (not now), but I don't even see the urgent need to get it closed without fixing first (and it got ASSIGNED already, so what's the use?)
This bug only shows in Firefox 2 of Fedora 8, so I know. I Mandriva 2008.0, Suse 10.3, Arch Core Dump, etc.. And none of these distributions have this problem.
> This bug only shows in Firefox 2 of Fedora 8, so I know. JFYI, it was also there in all the older fedoras unfortunately, and the 1.x versions of firefox were also affected. And the upstream have probably never had this bug at all, or did he? Very suspicious.
(In reply to comment #23) > No, sorry, IMHO this is clearly wrong. > Firstly, this bug is filled against Fedora 8. For > Fedora 8 it is _not_ an upstream bug. This was > discussed already. The bug is local and therefore, > at least as long as the Fedora 8 is concerned, it > can't be resolved as UPSTREAM. If you want to argue with me about words, go ahead (I was a lawyer by education, so I can enjoy this), but it doesn't help anything. To be totally blunt, I can assure you that the bug open here means absolutely nothing, because nobody will touch it (all our Firefox developers are pretty busy with making Firefox 3 working in Fedora and it seems to be enormous task. So, they decided that for Firefox 2 we do only security and crash bugs. We really cannot do more and if you will make a mess in our Bugzilla by reopening bugs no-one will ever touch, you won't help anything.
> To be totally blunt, I can assure you that the bug open here means absolutely > nothing, because nobody will touch it I know this, but the rest is false. This bug have never had an upstream counterpart, neither in the past, nor now. Obviously not in F8, to say the least (this bug is about F8 now, not F9 or rawhide). And the bug you've found in upstream, is different. When it is fixed, this bug will remain. I wanted to keep it opened only so that later I can promote it to F9 or rawhide - you yourself asked for testing it against rawhide, so I thought it makes sense.
Yeah, I was trying to find out whether it is reproducible on Rawhide (I was sick in a bed without access to my Rawhide office computer). Anyway, the point is that we try to move all non-packaging bugs to upstream and solve them there. If the bug is opened in the upstream bugzilla, there is a chance that either we will deal with it, or that somebody else will. Looking at it from this point of view, this actually makes you better than when the bug rottens here.
> If the bug is opened in the upstream bugzilla, there is a chance that > either we will deal with it, or that somebody else will. Yes, when the bugs are really the same. :) And your bug says instead: --- whole page is printed without regards that I have checked "Print selected text only" --- which to me means a totally different thing. But surely we can't argue about every bug report out there - lets have it closed if you feel that appropriate. You'll just have to find someone to re-test this bug after the upstream one is resolved, as I really suspect it won't get fixed by that. Or maybe it is already fixed in rawhide? We could find that out either by having it opened till someone confirms.
Created attachment 299316 [details] .spec file to the Firefox 2.0.0.12-1 and pango printing patch
After doing some research about this bug I find some points that should help with this bug: This bug only affects Red Hat like distros (Fedora, CentOS, Red Hat...) and appears after Firefox 1.5.0.7 and is present in Seamonkey too; Other distros, like Gentoo, Debian and Ubuntu doesn't have the bug, so, the problem is with our RPM; Rebuilding the RPM after disabling the "firefox-2.0-pango-printing.patch" Firefox restarts to print text selections. Let me say that the bug is (still) present in Fedora 9 beta with Firefox 3. The attachment contais the .spec of the SRPM from Firefox 2.0.0.12-1 with the pango printing suport dissabled and also contais the pango printing patch itself
Created attachment 299322 [details] firefox.spec from the zipfile (attachment 299316 [details])
Created attachment 299323 [details] firefox-2.0-pango-printing.patch from the zipfile (attachment 299316 [details])
Comment on attachment 299316 [details] .spec file to the Firefox 2.0.0.12-1 and pango printing patch we prefer separate files
Behdad?
Firefox 3 doesn't have the pango patch in question, so it can't be that if it still exists in FF3
Hello, folks. first of all, I'm happy to say that this bug is fixed in FF 3. Some friends gaved me the feedback that it isn't, but I tested it myself and all is working very well now. Thank guys. The new updated FF 2.0.0.13-1 came with the bug and as I said before, it cam be "fixed" disabling the pango path. Here cames attached the diff between an altered and a non altered .spec of FF 2.0.0.13-1, only for more info. Thanks again to fix this bug in FF3.
Created attachment 299444 [details] Diff between an altered and a non altered .spec file of FF 2.0.0.13-1
Changing version to '9' as part of upcoming Fedora 9 GA. More information and reason for this action is here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping
I am testing Fedora 9 now, e. .. The firefox continues with the problem of printing the text when we use the option to print only selection in this case the text is not printed. In other words, changed the version of Fedora, changed the version of Firefox, but not the bug, it stays the same!
Yes, folks, the bug is still here. Firefox 3.0-0.60.beta5.fc9 have the same bug too.
Does this bug is larger than the Fedora?
It seems finally that this bug was fixed. At least in the final version of Firefox in Fedora 9 ...
Unconfirmed with firefox-3.0-1.fc9.x86_64. But it behaves a bit differently now. To reproduce the bug again, you need a lengthy page, like, for example, this thread. If you select something at the top - it prints. If you select at the bottom - it does not. Can someone confirm this please?
Confirmed. In the case of a selection longer the impression of the text is deleted.
The bug from #44 is fixed in firefox 3.0.2...