Bug 62716 - Remove outdated chromium test expectations and rebaseline error message
Summary: Remove outdated chromium test expectations and rebaseline error message
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
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: 2011-06-15 04:17 PDT by Florian Schneider
Modified: 2011-06-18 13:53 PDT (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:

Attachments
Patch to fix this bug. (3.11 KB, patch)
2011-06-15 04:22 PDT, Florian Schneider 		no flags Details | Formatted Diff | Diff
Updated patch since part of the original patch already landed. (1.15 KB, patch)
2011-06-16 05:05 PDT, Florian Schneider 		no flags Details | Formatted Diff | Diff
Show Obsolete (2) View All Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Florian Schneider 2011-06-15 04:17:36 PDT 
This chromium bug has been fixed and the layout test fast/js/kde/encode_decode_uri.html passes.
Chromium issue: http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=66554

In addition, Object.defineProperty now throws a more meaningful error message so the:
fast/js/function-prototype-descriptor.html
needed a rebaseline.
Comment 1 Florian Schneider 2011-06-15 04:22:09 PDT 
Created attachment 97273 [details]
Patch to fix this bug.
Comment 2 Florian Schneider 2011-06-16 05:05:00 PDT 
Created attachment 97438 [details]
Updated patch since part of the original patch already landed.
Comment 3 anton muhin 2011-06-16 05:32:49 PDT 
Manually landed: http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/89024
Comment 4 Eric Seidel (no email) 2011-06-18 13:53:28 PDT 
Comment on attachment 97438 [details]
Updated patch since part of the original patch already landed.

Cleared review? from attachment 97438 [details] so that this bug does not appear in http://webkit.org/pending-review.  If you would like this patch reviewed, please attach it to a new bug (or re-open this bug before marking it for review again).