187285 2009-03-16 09:24:17 +0000 background-image not used when background-repeat used in body element [testcase][regression] 2009-03-26 06:59:37 +0000 1 1 2 Applications konqueror khtml 4.2.1 Slackware Linux RESOLVED FIXED NOR normal --- 1 hannibal konqueror-bugs-null andresbajotierra germain marcus 0 oldest_to_newest 731167 0 hannibal 2009-03-16 09:24:17 +0000 Version: (using KDE 4.2.1) Compiler: GCC 4.2.X or 4.3.X OS: Linux Installed from: Slackware Packages Konqueror 4.2.X refuses to render background image on body element when repeat-x is set. 3.5.X renders it correctly (as other browsers). Minimal testcase is below. It should show gradient background it but doesn't. <html> <head> <style type="text/css"> body { background-image: url('http://dentonet.pl/img/mainbg.png'); background-repeat: repeat-x; } </style> </head> <body> </body> </html> Removing background-repeat property causes to show background. The sigle line version "background:url('http://dentonet.pl/img/mainbg.png') repeat-x;" is also affected. 731168 1 32161 hannibal 2009-03-16 09:25:29 +0000 Created attachment 32161 Testcase 731231 2 andresbajotierra 2009-03-16 12:39:24 +0000 I can confirm here using: Qt: 4.5.0 + qt-copy-patches-936035 KDE: 4.2.66 (KDE 4.2.66 (KDE 4.3 >= 20090310)) kdelibs svn rev. 939600 / kdebase svn rev. 939602 on ArchLinux i686 - Kernel 2.6.28.7 731826 3 marcus 2009-03-17 19:44:32 +0000 Strangely, when the background-repeat option is used, the background only spans to the height of the content. However, when it isn't used, it spans the whole page. The question is whether this is standards compliant or not. 731829 4 32209 marcus 2009-03-17 19:47:34 +0000 Created attachment 32209 Shows the content spanning as opposed to the full-body spanning 731950 5 germain 2009-03-18 01:56:37 +0000 hmm looks like I goofed in r855521. Will have to look at that, thank you for the testcase. 732000 6 hannibal 2009-03-18 07:03:49 +0000 Marcus this is not true. Look at http://dentonet.pl/ there is a loot of content beneath the background is not show. 732084 7 marcus 2009-03-18 12:04:48 +0000 (In reply to comment #6) > Marcus this is not true. Look at http://dentonet.pl/ there is a loot of content > beneath the background is not show. It's difficult to test that reliably: looking at the source of the website, a lot of the elements are positioned absolutely - which would ignore the body settings, which is actually compliant to standards. As you can see, the bar at the top isn't positioned absolutely, meaning the body's background does span to its contents. 732161 8 hannibal 2009-03-18 14:49:58 +0000 > It's difficult to test that reliably: looking at the source of the website, a > lot of the elements are positioned absolutely Absoluty are positioned left part of the page (two narrow boxes) and some content of boxes in central part. The content of the central part is in "relative" div witch contain floated div witch again contain relatives. So "absolute" doesn't match here... Even if it apply, the background-color shouldn't be draw either. And backgrounds whithout "repeat" property should be also cut. Whatever will be decided, to cut or not to cut, khtml should do this in consistent way. However I prefer not to cut, as in other browsers. 732207 9 maksim 2009-03-18 16:25:52 +0000 Bug 172409 may be related. 733381 10 marcus 2009-03-21 16:58:56 +0000 (In reply to comment #8) > > It's difficult to test that reliably: looking at the source of the website, a > > lot of the elements are positioned absolutely > > Absoluty are positioned left part of the page (two narrow boxes) and some > content of boxes in central part. > > The content of the central part is in "relative" div witch contain floated div > witch again contain relatives. So "absolute" doesn't match here... > > > Even if it apply, the background-color shouldn't be draw either. And > backgrounds whithout "repeat" property should be also cut. > > Whatever will be decided, to cut or not to cut, khtml should do this in > consistent way. However I prefer not to cut, as in other browsers. Agreed: as a website designer, I'd like all browsers to behave in a consistent manner - which is kinda the point in standards-compliance. 734970 11 germain 2009-03-26 02:07:31 +0000 SVN commit 944739 by ggarand: fix regression in sizing of the background image for the root element. this regressed in r855521, as I didn't quite understood all the subtleties of the background size for the root case. BUG: 187285 M +30 -10 render_box.cpp WebSVN link: http://websvn.kde.org/?view=rev&revision=944739 734977 12 germain 2009-03-26 02:25:26 +0000 SVN commit 944745 by ggarand: automatically merged revision 944739: fix regression in sizing of the background image for the root element. this regressed in r855521, as I didn't quite understood all the subtleties of the background size for the root case. BUG: 187285 M +30 -10 render_box.cpp WebSVN link: http://websvn.kde.org/?view=rev&revision=944745 735030 13 hannibal 2009-03-26 06:59:37 +0000 Thanks for quick fix! 32161 2009-03-16 09:25:29 +0000 2009-03-16 09:25:29 +0000 Testcase minimal.html text/html 184 hannibal PGh0bWw+CjxoZWFkPgoJPHN0eWxlIHR5cGU9InRleHQvY3NzIj4KCWJvZHkgewoJCWJhY2tncm91 bmQtaW1hZ2U6IHVybCgnaHR0cDovL2RlbnRvbmV0LnBsL2ltZy9tYWluYmcucG5nJyk7CgkJYmFj a2dyb3VuZC1yZXBlYXQ6IHJlcGVhdC14OwoJfQoJPC9zdHlsZT4KPC9oZWFkPgo8Ym9keT4KPC9i b2R5Pgo8L2h0bWw+Cg== 32209 2009-03-17 19:47:34 +0000 2009-03-17 19:47:34 +0000 Shows the content spanning as opposed to the full-body spanning Test.html text/html 230 marcus PGh0bWw+CjxoZWFkPgogICAgPHN0eWxlIHR5cGU9InRleHQvY3NzIj4KYm9keSB7CiAgICBiYWNr Z3JvdW5kLWltYWdlOiB1cmwoJ2h0dHA6Ly9kZW50b25ldC5wbC9pbWcvbWFpbmJnLnBuZycpOwog ICAgYmFja2dyb3VuZC1yZXBlYXQ6IHJlcGVhdC14Owp9CiAgICA8L3N0eWxlPgo8L2hlYWQ+Cjxi b2R5Pgo8aDE+U29tZSBoZWFkaW5nPC9oMT4KPHA+U29tZSB0ZXh0PC9wPgo8L2JvZHk+CjwvaHRt bD4=