GNU bug report logs -
#17217
24.4.50; eww/shr and relative links
Previous Next
Reported by: joaotavora <at> gmail.com (João Távora)
Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2014 13:05:03 UTC
Severity: normal
Found in version 24.4.50
Done: joaotavora <at> gmail.com (João Távora)
Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.
To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 17217 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 17217 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.
Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.
Report forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
:
bug#17217
; Package
emacs
.
(Mon, 07 Apr 2014 13:05:03 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Acknowledgement sent
to
joaotavora <at> gmail.com (João Távora)
:
New bug report received and forwarded. Copy sent to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
.
(Mon, 07 Apr 2014 13:05:03 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Hi maintainers, Lars,
emacs -Q
M-x eww RET\
http://franz.com/support/documentation/current/doc/classes/excl/compiler-inconsistent-name-usage-warning.htm\
RET
Click on any link in the webpage, *eww* always reports 404, because it
couldn't follow a relative link with href="../../release-notes.htm". A
browser like chromium handles these nicely, so pressing
C-u RETq
on a link to open it in an external browser works, would navigate to
http://franz.com/support/documentation/current/doc/release-notes.htm
And not
http://franz.com/support/documentation/current/doc/classes/excl/../../release-notes.htm
No idea if ../../ is standards compliant, but it would be nice to
understand it.
Thanks,
João
In GNU Emacs 24.4.50.1 (i686-pc-mingw32)
of 2014-03-30 on LEG570
Repository revision: 116906 jan.h.d <at> swipnet.se-20140329120847-qr6hgyxpd0tk2yve
Windowing system distributor `Microsoft Corp.', version 5.1.2600
Configured using:
`configure --enable-checking 'CFLAGS=-O0 -g3' CPPFLAGS=-DGLYPH_DEBUG=1'
Configured features:
XPM JPEG TIFF GIF PNG RSVG NOTIFY ACL GNUTLS LIBXML2 ZLIB
Important settings:
value of $LANG: C.UTF-8
locale-coding-system: cp1252
Major mode: Fundamental
Minor modes in effect:
global-edit-server-edit-mode: t
ido-vertical-mode: t
electric-pair-mode: t
ido-everywhere: t
delete-selection-mode: t
global-auto-revert-mode: t
show-paren-mode: t
electric-indent-mode: t
mouse-wheel-mode: t
file-name-shadow-mode: t
global-font-lock-mode: t
font-lock-mode: t
blink-cursor-mode: t
auto-composition-mode: t
auto-encryption-mode: t
auto-compression-mode: t
line-number-mode: t
transient-mark-mode: t
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
:
bug#17217
; Package
emacs
.
(Mon, 07 Apr 2014 21:02:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #8 received at 17217 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
joaotavora <at> gmail.com (João Távora) writes:
> Hi maintainers, Lars,
>
> emacs -Q
> M-x eww RET\
> http://franz.com/support/documentation/current/doc/classes/excl/compiler-inconsistent-name-usage-warning.htm\
> RET
>
> Click on any link in the webpage, *eww* always reports 404, because it
> couldn't follow a relative link with href="../../release-notes.htm". A
This patch seems to fix it,
=== modified file 'lisp/net/shr.el'
*** lisp/net/shr.el 2014-03-05 18:44:58 +0000
--- lisp/net/shr.el 2014-04-07 20:59:33 +0000
***************
*** 610,616 ****
(concat (nth 3 base) url))
(t
;; Totally relative.
! (concat (car base) (cadr base) url))))
(defun shr-ensure-newline ()
(unless (zerop (current-column))
--- 610,616 ----
(concat (nth 3 base) url))
(t
;; Totally relative.
! (concat (car base) (expand-file-name url (cadr base))))))
(defun shr-ensure-newline ()
(unless (zerop (current-column))
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
:
bug#17217
; Package
emacs
.
(Fri, 11 Apr 2014 15:10:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #11 received at 17217 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Hello Lars,
I though I had CC'ed on this bug report, but apparently I didn't. Any
change you can have a look at this before the pretest? I have commit
rights and can perform the fix, but I didn't test thoroughly.
João
>> Hi maintainers, Lars,
>>
>> emacs -Q
>> M-x eww RET\
>> http://franz.com/support/documentation/current/doc/classes/excl/compiler-inconsistent-name-usage-warning.htm\
>> RET
>>
>> Click on any link in the webpage, *eww* always reports 404, because it
>> couldn't follow a relative link with href="../../release-notes.htm". A
>
> This patch seems to fix it,
>
> === modified file 'lisp/net/shr.el'
> *** lisp/net/shr.el 2014-03-05 18:44:58 +0000
> --- lisp/net/shr.el 2014-04-07 20:59:33 +0000
> ***************
> *** 610,616 ****
> (concat (nth 3 base) url))
> (t
> ;; Totally relative.
> ! (concat (car base) (cadr base) url))))
>
> (defun shr-ensure-newline ()
> (unless (zerop (current-column))
> --- 610,616 ----
> (concat (nth 3 base) url))
> (t
> ;; Totally relative.
> ! (concat (car base) (expand-file-name url (cadr base))))))
>
> (defun shr-ensure-newline ()
> (unless (zerop (current-column))
Reply sent
to
joaotavora <at> gmail.com (João Távora)
:
You have taken responsibility.
(Mon, 14 Apr 2014 22:07:03 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Notification sent
to
joaotavora <at> gmail.com (João Távora)
:
bug acknowledged by developer.
(Mon, 14 Apr 2014 22:07:04 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #16 received at 17217-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> IRO.UMontreal.CA> writes:
>> PS: By te way have you seen my report and possible fix for bug 17217?
> Yes.
>
>> I can't seem to get Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen to answer and I think it's
>> an easy fix.
> Yes, it looks OK, feel free to install it.
Done.
João
bug archived.
Request was from
Debbugs Internal Request <help-debbugs <at> gnu.org>
to
internal_control <at> debbugs.gnu.org
.
(Tue, 13 May 2014 11:24:03 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
bug unarchived.
Request was from
Ted Zlatanov <tzz <at> lifelogs.com>
to
control <at> debbugs.gnu.org
.
(Tue, 04 Nov 2014 16:53:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
:
bug#17217
; Package
emacs
.
(Tue, 04 Nov 2014 18:43:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #23 received at 17217 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Ted,
A fix has already been comitted by me, perhaps I forgot to CC
the bugtracker with a close message.
I also forgot how to do that in the meantime.
Consider also that this fix brings about a new problem on MS windows,
one that has also been
fixed for Emacs 24.4, that's bug#18310, if I'm not mistaken.
Both fixes should go into trunk when the bugfix mergeback happens
(that is If I understand
the workflow correctly).
João
On Tue, Nov 4, 2014 at 4:47 PM, Ted Zlatanov <tzz <at> lifelogs.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Apr 2014 16:08:52 +0100 joaotavora <at> gmail.com (João Távora) wrote:
>
> JT> I have commit rights and can perform the fix, but I didn't test
> JT> thoroughly.
>
> The fix works OK for me and Lars hasn't responded, so I would commit it.
>
> Ted
--
João Távora
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
:
bug#17217
; Package
emacs
.
(Tue, 04 Nov 2014 18:52:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #26 received at 17217-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
On Tue, 4 Nov 2014 18:42:18 +0000 João Távora <joaotavora <at> gmail.com> wrote:
JT> A fix has already been comitted by me, perhaps I forgot to CC
JT> the bugtracker with a close message.
Yeah, I didn't see it. Marking as done now, you just add "-done" to the
bug number in the reply address.
JT> Consider also that this fix brings about a new problem on MS windows,
JT> one that has also been
JT> fixed for Emacs 24.4, that's bug#18310, if I'm not mistaken.
JT> Both fixes should go into trunk when the bugfix mergeback happens
JT> (that is If I understand
JT> the workflow correctly).
I see it in the emacs-24 branch but not in trunk. I'm not sure if it
will get ported forward by someone or you have to do it.
Author: João Távora <joaotavora <at> gmail.com>
Date: Tue Aug 26 22:04:47 2014 -0700
* net/shr.el (shr-expand-url): Plain expand-file-name is not enough;
use url-expand-file-name.
HTH
Ted
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
:
bug#17217
; Package
emacs
.
(Tue, 04 Nov 2014 19:38:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #29 received at 17217-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
OK, I can do it. At any rate I think I can do this after the git
switchover, which is
preferable to relearning bzr just for this change.
João
On Tue, Nov 4, 2014 at 6:51 PM, Ted Zlatanov <tzz <at> lifelogs.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 4 Nov 2014 18:42:18 +0000 João Távora <joaotavora <at> gmail.com> wrote:
>
> JT> A fix has already been comitted by me, perhaps I forgot to CC
> JT> the bugtracker with a close message.
>
> Yeah, I didn't see it. Marking as done now, you just add "-done" to the
> bug number in the reply address.
>
> JT> Consider also that this fix brings about a new problem on MS windows,
> JT> one that has also been
> JT> fixed for Emacs 24.4, that's bug#18310, if I'm not mistaken.
>
> JT> Both fixes should go into trunk when the bugfix mergeback happens
> JT> (that is If I understand
> JT> the workflow correctly).
>
> I see it in the emacs-24 branch but not in trunk. I'm not sure if it
> will get ported forward by someone or you have to do it.
>
> Author: João Távora <joaotavora <at> gmail.com>
> Date: Tue Aug 26 22:04:47 2014 -0700
>
> * net/shr.el (shr-expand-url): Plain expand-file-name is not enough;
> use url-expand-file-name.
>
> HTH
> Ted
--
João Távora
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
:
bug#17217
; Package
emacs
.
(Tue, 04 Nov 2014 19:46:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #32 received at 17217 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
I don't know why you guys are confused. You know the bug is closed, because
i) you (João) closed it
ii) you (Ted) had to unarchive it to have this conversation, and only
closed bugs get archived.
And the change is (of course) already in trunk thanks to the "automatic"
merging that has gone on as long as the emacs-24 branch has existed.
There's nothing to do here.
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
:
bug#17217
; Package
emacs
.
(Tue, 04 Nov 2014 19:56:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #35 received at 17217 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
PS Ted, whatever method you are using to find bugs, it should exclude
closed ones (certainly archived ones). Both the debbugs.gnu.org search
and (I believe) debbugs.el do so by default.
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
:
bug#17217
; Package
emacs
.
(Tue, 04 Nov 2014 20:15:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #38 received at 17217 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
On Tue, 04 Nov 2014 14:45:31 -0500 Glenn Morris <rgm <at> gnu.org> wrote:
GM> I don't know why you guys are confused. You know the bug is closed, because
GM> i) you (João) closed it
GM> ii) you (Ted) had to unarchive it to have this conversation, and only
GM> closed bugs get archived.
I thought archiving applied to inactive bugs, not just closed ones. So I
unarchived thinking "it's been inactive."
Thanks for explaining.
GM> And the change is (of course) already in trunk thanks to the "automatic"
GM> merging that has gone on as long as the emacs-24 branch has existed.
GM> There's nothing to do here.
That's what I thought, but I didn't see the change. It was pilot error:
I used bzr log incorrectly and missed the merge commit.
GM> PS Ted, whatever method you are using to find bugs, it should exclude
GM> closed ones (certainly archived ones). Both the debbugs.gnu.org search
GM> and (I believe) debbugs.el do so by default.
OK, thanks, will do. Sorry for the noise.
Ted
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
:
bug#17217
; Package
emacs
.
(Tue, 04 Nov 2014 21:11:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #41 received at 17217 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Sorry Glenn for the noise indeed, so it appears I did send that
message after all.
On Tue, Nov 4, 2014 at 8:14 PM, Ted Zlatanov <tzz <at> lifelogs.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 04 Nov 2014 14:45:31 -0500 Glenn Morris <rgm <at> gnu.org> wrote:
>
> GM> I don't know why you guys are confused. You know the bug is closed, because
>
> GM> i) you (João) closed it
>
> GM> ii) you (Ted) had to unarchive it to have this conversation, and only
> GM> closed bugs get archived.
>
> I thought archiving applied to inactive bugs, not just closed ones. So I
> unarchived thinking "it's been inactive."
>
> Thanks for explaining.
>
> GM> And the change is (of course) already in trunk thanks to the "automatic"
> GM> merging that has gone on as long as the emacs-24 branch has existed.
>
> GM> There's nothing to do here.
>
> That's what I thought, but I didn't see the change. It was pilot error:
> I used bzr log incorrectly and missed the merge commit.
>
> GM> PS Ted, whatever method you are using to find bugs, it should exclude
> GM> closed ones (certainly archived ones). Both the debbugs.gnu.org search
> GM> and (I believe) debbugs.el do so by default.
>
> OK, thanks, will do. Sorry for the noise.
>
> Ted
--
João Távora
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
:
bug#17217
; Package
emacs
.
(Wed, 05 Nov 2014 16:53:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #44 received at 17217 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Ted Zlatanov wrote:
> I thought archiving applied to inactive bugs, not just closed ones. So I
> unarchived thinking "it's been inactive."
No, only closed bugs ever get archived (after one month with no comments).
Open ones hang around for ever to haunt us...
bug archived.
Request was from
Debbugs Internal Request <help-debbugs <at> gnu.org>
to
internal_control <at> debbugs.gnu.org
.
(Thu, 04 Dec 2014 12:24:04 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
This bug report was last modified 9 years and 167 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.