GNU bug report logs -
#4951
23.1.50; browse-url-default-windows-browser bug + patch
Previous Next
Full log
View this message in rfc822 format
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 2:00 PM, Lennart Borgman
<lennart.borgman <at> gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 6:54 AM, Jason Rumney <jasonr <at> f2s.com> wrote:
>> Lennart Borgman wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 4:35 AM, Stefan Monnier
>>> <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> browse-url-default-windows-browser does not work any longer. I am
>>>>> unsure when it stopped working, but on at least Windows XP the
>>>>> attached patch seems necessary. Could we please apply this as soon as
>>>>> possible so it will get tested?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Could you explain why it's necessary? I mean I understand you say that
>>>> the current doesn't work, but I'd like to understand why it doesn't work.
>>>>
>>>
>>> No, I do not understand why it is necessary ... ;-)
>>>
>>> There are two changes:
>>>
>>> 1) file: => file:///
>>>
>>> This was discussed some time ago (a yr or two?) and it looks like this
>>> is a more correct syntax for the file URL.
>>>
>>
>> Is it actually needed, or is this purely an aesthetic thing? The RFCs are
>> not clear whether either is more correct, as the file: scheme is not
>> explicitly defined, and not all URL schemes require a server to be specified
>> before the file path. As far as I can tell, either option is accepted by
>> Windows itself, but if the association passes the URL intact rather than
>> after converting to a file argument by Windows, then there may be
>> applications that accept one but not the other.
>>
>> IIRC the main reason for using file: rather than file:/// was that if the
>> same code is used on all platforms, then the former works, while the latter
>> does not (too many / when combined with posix paths). But as this is now in
>> a (windows-nt msdos cygwin) conditional, that is not really important, and
>> we should use what works.
>
>
> This is perhaps not needed, but it seems more consistent and I
> therefore thinks that there is a better chance that this works. (I
> have been using this very long, but I can't remember any more why I
> switched.)
>
>
>>> 2) Changing the verb to w32-shell-execute (ShellExecute) from "open"
>>> to nil is for some reason I do not know necessary. The answer to why
>>> hides deep within the w32 registry and maybe some knowledgeable
>>> persons at MS... It might be a mismatch of some kind, I don't know. I
>>> believe the verbs are not that well thought out and used all the time.
>>> Probably the registry entry has taken over from the program code
>>> (which give users and other programs better possibilities).
>>>
>>
>> It is likely a misconfiguration on your system. "open" is the standard verb
>> for opening files, and should avoid the security problems associated with
>> using nil for executable file types where the system's default action is
>> something other than "open".
>
>
> You might be right. I thought that file:/// was special and would
> always be opened in a web browser, but that is maybe not at all true.
>
> I do not know how Windows handles this. Are there any special w32
> registry entries for file: that you are aware of?
>
> Just looking at Explorer under Tools - Folder Options and then File
> Types it looks like the file:/// URL is not handled special since
> there is no entry there for this URL type, but that is not correct. It
> is handled specially. Here are some tests I have made:
>
> (w32-shell-execute "open" "c:/some/file.html") ;; OK
> (w32-shell-execute nil "file:c:/some/file.html") ;; OK
> (w32-shell-execute nil "file:///c:/some/file.html") ;; OK
> (w32-shell-execute "open" "file:///c:/some/file.html") ;; Doesn't work
> (w32-shell-execute "open" "file:c:/some/file.html") ;; Doesn't work
Jason (or someone else), I have this in the registry
Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00
[HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\file]
"URL Protocol"=""
@="URL:File Protocol"
"Source Filter"="{E436EBB6-524F-11CE-9F53-0020AF0BA770}"
[HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\file\CLSID]
@="{00000303-0000-0000-C000-000000000046}"
I believe this is what ShellExecute uses for a file:/// type url. This
does not work for me when "open" is specified to w32-shell-execute,
see above. What do you have in the registry here? There must be
something I am missing since "open" works for you but not for me.
This bug report was last modified 13 years and 313 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.