Gentoo Websites Logo
Go to: Gentoo Home Documentation Forums Lists Bugs Planet Store Wiki Get Gentoo!
Bug 487622 - app-misc/mime-types sets jpe as the primary extension for image/jpeg, causing some applications to save using that extension
Summary: app-misc/mime-types sets jpe as the primary extension for image/jpeg, causing...
Status: CONFIRMED
Alias: None
Product: Gentoo Linux
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Current packages (show other bugs)
Hardware: All Linux
: Normal normal (vote)
Assignee: Dirkjan Ochtman
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2013-10-11 11:20 UTC by Dustin J. Mitchell
Modified: 2013-10-12 10:59 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
Package list:
Runtime testing required: ---


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Dustin J. Mitchell 2013-10-11 11:20:24 UTC
> dustin@euclid ~/tmp/mime-types-9 $ grep ^image/jpeg /etc/mime.types
> image/jpeg                                                                                                      jpe jpeg jpg

But on CentOS/RHEL 6.2:
> image/jpeg                                      jpeg jpg jpe jfif

And on Ubuntu 12.0.4:
>image/jpeg                                      jpeg jpg jpe

And on OS X 10.7:
> image/jpeg                                      jpeg jpg jpe jfif

The visible result of this is that Firefox will tend to name JPEGs "foo.jpe" when saving them, similar to https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=414201

The more immediate consequence is that the docshell/test/unit/test_bug414201_jfif.js test fails when run on a Gentoo system.  I'm discussing with the Mozilla developers whether this is an expected failure of the test (that is, whether the test is testing the Firefox codebase only, or also the system it runs on).
Comment 1 Dirkjan Ochtman gentoo-dev 2013-10-11 18:34:18 UTC
Heh, tricky. I didn't know the order of extensions mattered at all! Let me see if there's a way to rejigger my script to make this better.
Comment 2 Dustin J. Mitchell 2013-10-12 10:59:23 UTC
Yeah, I can't actually find *any* documentation of this file, but "Firefox thinks so" is close enough to "Netscape thought so" that it's probably authoritative.