Bug 133803 - REGRESSION(169799): [GTK] several layout tests on editing/ fail
Summary: REGRESSION(169799): [GTK] several layout tests on editing/ fail
Status: NEW
Alias: None
Product: WebKit
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Tools / Tests (show other bugs)
Version: 528+ (Nightly build)
Hardware: Unspecified Unspecified
: P2 Normal
Assignee: Nobody
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2014-06-12 10:01 PDT by Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez
Modified: 2017-03-11 10:47 PST (History)
4 users (show)

See Also:


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Comment 1 Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez 2014-06-12 11:40:16 PDT
I added this tests to the GTK TestExpectations on http://webkit.org/b/133811
Comment 2 Carlos Garcia Campos 2014-06-13 01:30:47 PDT
I'm not sure this is a regression, are you sure our own expectation files are correct? The actual result I see for editing/deleting/delete-by-word-001 looks the same than cross-platform expected results. Note that the test does:

    if (navigator.userAgent.search(/\bMac OS X\b/) != -1)
        deleteWordModifiers = ["altKey"];
    else
        deleteWordModifiers = ["ctrlKey"];

So, before r169799 we were using the alt key instead of the control key, which I think was wrong.
Comment 3 Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez 2014-06-13 04:25:20 PDT
(In reply to comment #2)
> I'm not sure this is a regression, are you sure our own expectation files are correct? The actual result I see for editing/deleting/delete-by-word-001 looks the same than cross-platform expected results. Note that the test does:
> 
>     if (navigator.userAgent.search(/\bMac OS X\b/) != -1)
>         deleteWordModifiers = ["altKey"];
>     else
>         deleteWordModifiers = ["ctrlKey"];
> 
> So, before r169799 we were using the alt key instead of the control key, which I think was wrong.

It may be be that the test expectations for this tests before r169799 were wrong.

Lorenzo commented that r169799 made a bunch of tests to pass, so maybe this ones that started to fail just need to be rebaselined.

Compare the results:

169798 -> layout-test 16 failures 13 new passes 23 flakes 1 missing results http://build.webkit.org/builders/GTK%20Linux%2064-bit%20Release%20%28Tests%29/builds/744
169799 -> layout-test 20 failures 21 new passes 15 flakes 1 missing results http://build.webkit.org/builders/GTK%20Linux%2064-bit%20Release%20%28Tests%29/builds/745
Comment 4 Sergio Villar Senin 2014-06-13 08:12:28 PDT
(In reply to comment #3)
> It may be be that the test expectations for this tests before r169799 were wrong.
> 
> Lorenzo commented that r169799 made a bunch of tests to pass, so maybe this ones that started to fail just need to be rebaselined.

Let's rebaseline them and remove as many platform specific results as possible.