MozillaZine

Open with "do this automatically" doesnt remember

User Help for Mozilla Firefox
Alice

User avatar
 
Posts: 2627
Joined: April 23rd, 2003, 11:47 am

Post Posted July 31st, 2007, 8:01 am

The real bug is that Firefox is making the "do this automatically" checkbox available in the first place, in cases where it should be grayed out:
http://kb.mozillazine.org/File_types_an ... ing_dialog
In certain situations, you may not be able to set an automatic download action because the choice to automatically perform the action for future downloads will either not be remembered or the option will be "grayed-out"<snip>. This problem can occur when a misconfigured web server incorrectly sends the file with the MIME type "application/octet-stream" or "text/plain". It also can happen if the server assigns "Content-Disposition: attachment" to the download [1].

This is a long-standing problem in Firefox, mentioned here:
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=250914

More discussion on the Firefox bugs related to the "do this automatically" option not being grayed-out, resulting in users wondering why Firefox is not remembering their choice to set an automatic download action, can be found in this topic:
http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic.php?t=521648
does not "do this automatically from now on"
schapel wrote:There are some bug reports on the issue already:
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=382987
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=347843
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=331259
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=285976
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=250914

I would still suggest collecting information here first before commenting in those bug reports. There are different issues discussed in the different bug reports, and we should put the information into the correct bug report so as not to further confuse the issue.
Alice Wyman

Avernar
 
Posts: 1
Joined: October 10th, 2007, 11:40 am

Post Posted October 10th, 2007, 12:05 pm

Alice wrote:The real bug is that Firefox is making the "do this automatically" checkbox available in the first place, in cases where it should be grayed out:


But who's the one that determines what should be the proper behavior?

a) Some RFC author writing a proposed standard about a Mail User Agent (MUA)
b) Some Mozilla developer applying a email RFC to a browser
c) The hundreds of underpaid web server admins, most of which have no clue of how "Content-Disposition: attachment" affects Firefox
d) The end user who should be in 100% control of how an application interacts with them

Since this issue does not affect the remote server one bit, the answer is d.

There is no way I can get all the web sites I visit to correctly set the Content-Disposition option properly. I can't even get the one that matters the most (my banking site) to do it. We basically have three options:

1) Honor the "do this automatically" check box
2) Disable the check box when appropriate
3) Option 2 by default but have an about:config option to switch to option 1

Option 1 would make the RFC purists unhappy. Option 2 would make the end users unhappy. So why not make everyone happy and do option 3?

Right now I'm compiling my own version of Firefox with a patch to implement option 1 as it was easier than option 3.

old FatJohn
 
Posts: 0
Joined: December 31st, 1969, 5:00 pm

Post Posted October 10th, 2007, 1:03 pm

W3C decides. We should live or die by it. As Mozilla has done pretty much. That's good. Have you used the 'report as broken' function?

Avernar
 
Posts: 1
Joined: October 10th, 2007, 11:40 am

Post Posted October 11th, 2007, 12:06 pm

FatJohn wrote:W3C decides. We should live or die by it. As Mozilla has done pretty much. That's good. Have you used the 'report as broken' function?

For how someone else's content looks, yes. For how my computer interacts with me, no. And when the two conflict, my choice wins. Remember the blink tag? If sites kept using it guess how fast it would get disabled on my end. Like I wrote before, follow the standards to the letter as long as you give me a way to change things (about:config).

My point is that this RFC which is not a W3C standard (heck, it's a Request For Comments not a standard) was written with Email clients in mind. The fact that browsers use mime type for download has the negative side effect of pulling in all this extra email only baggage.

And there's several ways of interpreting the RFC. "Content-Disposition: attachment" for an email client means don't display it inline but allow the user to view it by clicking it or select it for saving. I've already TOLD the browser to open/download it. There's the user action the RFC wanted. And I've TOLD the browser what I want to do with it and TO NOT bother me each and every time I do this.

And yes, I've voted for the existing bug on this issue. Unfortunately it's the solution proposed by the bug reporter I want but all these people keep writing that the "proper solution" or the "real bug" is to disable the box.

Why can't people get it into their heads that not all standards are perfect. If something aggravates or annoys the end user, give them some way to override the "standard" behavior.

egoego
 
Posts: 57
Joined: August 9th, 2006, 5:54 am
Location: Moscow, Russia

Post Posted November 17th, 2007, 7:02 am

Is it possible to build an extension to override this behaviour?

trodas

User avatar
 
Posts: 184
Joined: September 10th, 2005, 2:35 am
Location: Czech republic

Post Posted November 25th, 2007, 4:55 am

I use FF v1.08 to fix the problem and it is flawless. Other FFs are just buggy and useless. Plain simple as that.
"It is dangerous to be right in matters on which the established authorities are wrong." - Voltaire
"I believe that all the people who stand to profit by a war and who help provoke it should be shot on the first day it starts..." - Hemingway :-) my config - my caps

malliz
Folder@Home

User avatar
 
Posts: 43842
Joined: December 7th, 2002, 4:34 am
Location: Australia

Post Posted November 25th, 2007, 5:08 am

Very silly advice. 1.8 is full of security bugs and recommending people use it, is extremely foolish.
What sort of man would put a known criminal in charge of a major branch of government? Apart from, say, the average voter.
"Terry Pratchett"

trodas

User avatar
 
Posts: 184
Joined: September 10th, 2005, 2:35 am
Location: Czech republic

Post Posted November 25th, 2007, 7:17 am

1.0.8, not 1.8 ... 1.8 is useless regarding this bug: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=250914
"It is dangerous to be right in matters on which the established authorities are wrong." - Voltaire
"I believe that all the people who stand to profit by a war and who help provoke it should be shot on the first day it starts..." - Hemingway :-) my config - my caps

egoego
 
Posts: 57
Joined: August 9th, 2006, 5:54 am
Location: Moscow, Russia

Post Posted November 25th, 2007, 11:50 am

There are plenty of security vulnerabilities in Firefox 1.0.8, not to mention a zillion of bugs fixed since then and the new location bar autocomplete in Firefox 3.

trodas

User avatar
 
Posts: 184
Joined: September 10th, 2005, 2:35 am
Location: Czech republic

Post Posted November 26th, 2007, 8:20 am

Frankly spoken - none of the "plenty of security vulnerabilities" and "zillion of bugs fixed" does not mean jack to me, as long, as the MIME file recognition is broken.
"It is dangerous to be right in matters on which the established authorities are wrong." - Voltaire
"I believe that all the people who stand to profit by a war and who help provoke it should be shot on the first day it starts..." - Hemingway :-) my config - my caps

jotekman
 
Posts: 2
Joined: December 29th, 2007, 2:42 pm

Post Posted December 29th, 2007, 3:26 pm

No offense, but saying "Use 1.0.8" is not a very smart nor viable option for people who want to have the newest, or even a newer version, of Firefox. I personally like firefox 2.x better than 1.x, and to push using a version rather than pushing to fix a problem that has continued through EVERY version except, apparently, for 1.0.8, is much more of a sensible option. Not everyone likes to stick with older versions of software. If they were absolutely perfect, then the developers wouldn't need to make newer versions.

I also agree that it should be the end user's choice. The mime-type file download issue has been hyped by people here and there, and the coders on here, from what I have read, seem to blame it on the webmasters, and say that they should fix it. Okaaaay. Fine, it is their fault, but fixing the ONE application to have leeway in handling these files seems to be an INCREDIBLY easier option than trying to get the MILLIONS of webpages fixed that may have this problem.

Return to Firefox Support


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests