Fedora Account System
Red Hat Associate
Red Hat Customer
Description of problem: After a fresh install of firefox using yum, there is no menu entry for firefox Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): firefox-3.0-0.59.beta5.fc9.x86_64 How reproducible: Untested, but probably always Steps to Reproduce: 1. Install Fedora 9 Preview x86_64 Live KDE 2. Update all packages 3. yum install firefox Actual results: No menu entry in Applications -> Entry Expected results: A menu entry for firefox in Applications -> Entry Additional info: The firefox menu entry exists after a reboot. Perhaps a session logout/login would be enough to get the menu entry
Humm... Not sure this is a firefox package bug as I just get the same behaviour with another one. So, I don't know to which package report this "problem"
Hmm... trying kdebase then for now as a best guess since you're using the kde live cd. obviously, firefox is installing the desktop file, and it's being used by kde, just not on demand... Kick back if you think this really is a firefox bug.
Sounds like the ages-old KDE bug (which is also in KDE 3 and has been there for years) where new menu entries aren't always added to the menu right away. Logging out and back in or rebooting altogether should "fix" it.
Not ages old exactly, it's always worked for me. :) (kde uses fam/gamin to "watch" the filesystem to changes, and is supposed to update automatically) I'll see if I can reproduce.
Confirmed. steps to reproduce: 1. confirm firefox is installed and in menus 2. yum remove firefox 3. confirm firefox is now gone from menus 4. yum install firefox 5. firefox isn't present in menus Hrm, repeated this 3 times. trial 1: firefox didn't appear trial 2 & 3: firefox *did* appear wtf? regardless, something isn't quite right here. I'd say time to file issue upstream @ bugs.kde.org
> and is supposed to update automatically It's supposed to and it usually does, but sometimes it just doesn't work.
"sometimes it just doesn't work.". Bug report? :)
Checked upstream and could not find a matching bug. Please file with bugs.kde.org and update this report with bug info.
Isn't it the role of the packager than doing that?
No. This has been debated many times on the mailing list. Upstream will want to talk to the actual reporter, not a middle-man. That said, in this case, at least Rex can reproduce it, so we can file it upstream if you really don't want to do it.
> Isn't it the role of the packager than doing that? :) yes and no. I'm game to do it, since I can reproduce, but it may be awhile till I get round-tuit.
(In reply to comment #10) > No. > This has been debated many times on the mailing list. Upstream will want to > talk to the actual reporter, not a middle-man. > That said, in this case, at least Rex can reproduce it, so we can file it > upstream if you really don't want to do it. I just ask a question! I never say I didn't want to report it. But I can't report it before tomorrow as I'm not on the machine where I have a KDE bug report account.
In addition, upstream often say "Update to the latest version", which, of course, isn't yet packaged.
4.0.3 is still the latest stable version. (They can't really expect you to have 4.0.4 which was tagged 3 hours ago and which won't be on their own download site for about a week.)
I would have to be more precise, I am not talking just about this bug when I say upstream, I anted to say in general. Sorry for the confusion.
(In reply to comment #11) > > Isn't it the role of the packager than doing that? > > :) yes and no. I say « yes ! » ;-) > I'm game to do it, since I can reproduce, but it may be awhile > till I get round-tuit. Sorry Rex, but because my english, I didn't understand what you mean. If you fill the bug, could you please put me as CC? If not, I'll fill it tomorrow (I'm GMT + or - 1, I don't remember ;-) ), so, tell me if you want to be CCed
Closing in favor of the upstream report. Will continue to monitor it there.
Why closing this bug as it isn't fixed by upstream? I monitor opened bugs, not closed
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/page.cgi?id=fields.html#upstream for more explanation of what CLOSED/UPSTREAM means.
While we wait for an upstream answer, there's nothing we can do about this bug (as we don't have the resources to fix every single bug ourselves, and we have several more important ones to deal with), that's why it's closed. Once upstream has a fix, there are 2 possibilities: 1. we consider this important enough and the fix uninvasive enough to backport upstream's fix: we'll reopen the bug, apply the fix, and close the bug once we have applied upstream's fix. 2. we decide that this can wait for the next upstream release which will get us the patch automatically. In this case, we just leave the bug in CLOSED UPSTREAM state.