Opened 3 years ago
Last modified 3 years ago
#20150 new defect
Tor Browser's Update window initially shows "NaN/sec"
Reported by: | teor | Owned by: | tbb-team |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | Medium | Milestone: | |
Component: | Applications/Tor Browser | Version: | |
Severity: | Normal | Keywords: | |
Cc: | brade, mcs | Actual Points: | |
Parent ID: | Points: | ||
Reviewer: | Sponsor: |
Description
When the download hasn't started, Tor Browser's Update window shows "NaN/sec", likely because of a division by zero.
It would be nice if it showed something understandable instead, like "connecting".
Child Tickets
Change History (3)
comment:1 follow-up: 2 Changed 3 years ago by
Cc: | brade mcs added |
---|
comment:2 Changed 3 years ago by
Replying to mcs:
This is probably also a bug in Firefox although I did not find a bug report at bugzilla.mozilla.org. There is a "Connecting to the update server…" message that is shown initially and presumably it is not supposed to be changed until the download size is known.
Are you able to reproduce this reliably? On what OS? I have seen this in the past (but not recently) and I was not able to reproduce it with a 6.0.4 to 6.0.5 update. From a quick read of the code, I would say it tries to avoid division by zero, but there are enough layers of code that I am not 100% sure (divide by zero does seem like the most likely root cause of this).
I am on OS X. I am also on networks where latency is high (~100-500ms), so that could be a factor.
I'll see if I can replicate the issue with Tor Browser 6.0.4 -> 6.0.5.
comment:3 Changed 3 years ago by
No, I can't replicate this issue with Tor Browser 6.0.4 -> 6.0.5. I think it requires the update download to be particularly slow.
This is probably also a bug in Firefox although I did not find a bug report at bugzilla.mozilla.org. There is a "Connecting to the update server…" message that is shown initially and presumably it is not supposed to be changed until the download size is known.
Are you able to reproduce this reliably? On what OS? I have seen this in the past (but not recently) and I was not able to reproduce it with a 6.0.4 to 6.0.5 update. From a quick read of the code, I would say it tries to avoid division by zero, but there are enough layers of code that I am not 100% sure (divide by zero does seem like the most likely root cause of this).