After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 775736 - adblocker sometimes fails to block ads
adblocker sometimes fails to block ads
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Product: epiphany
Classification: Core
Component: General
3.22.x (obsolete)
Other Linux
: Normal normal
: ---
Assigned To: Epiphany Maintainers
Epiphany Maintainers
: 735309 (view as bug list)
Depends on:
Blocks: 776514
 
 
Reported: 2016-12-07 02:52 UTC by erusan
Modified: 2016-12-26 23:01 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---


Attachments
uri-tester: process patterns synchronously at startup (5.77 KB, patch)
2016-12-17 03:23 UTC, Michael Catanzaro
committed Details | Review
uri-tester: Remove commented code (1.47 KB, patch)
2016-12-17 03:23 UTC, Michael Catanzaro
committed Details | Review

Comment 1 Michael Catanzaro 2016-12-13 21:25:37 UTC
I think this was probably fixed in bug #775067 (which looks unrelated from the title but rewrote a huge chunk of this code). It looks like we were not waiting for adblock patterns to be fully processed before testing URLs against them. It's important to not load anything before adblock is ready, even though that will slow down starting the browser. The problem is those changes are too big and intrusive to backport to 3.22.
Comment 2 Michael Catanzaro 2016-12-13 21:40:46 UTC
One more thing: if my guess in comment #1 is correct, then that would mean the ads only ever get shown in new tabs. Each tab has its own web process that has to load the adblock filters separately, and the first page load is racing against that.
Comment 3 Michael Catanzaro 2016-12-13 21:45:44 UTC
(In reply to Michael Catanzaro from comment #1)
> I think this was probably fixed in bug #775067 (which looks unrelated from
> the title but rewrote a huge chunk of this code).

By the way: you are not going to like that that has removed support for having multiple adblock filters. We really need to bring that back and add a filters configuration dialog, but that's a matter for another bug report....
Comment 4 Michael Catanzaro 2016-12-13 21:54:11 UTC
OK, I looked into what it would take to fix this in 3.22 and I'm not really comfortable with making changes there, so this will just have to be something that's fixed for 3.24... in any case, thanks for reporting!
Comment 5 erusan 2016-12-13 22:24:30 UTC
If we can only have one filter in 3.24, will there be a way to change that list? For instance, each list has a header indicating the source URL and how often it should be refreshed. Would this file or header be able to be changed manually in order to point to another list?
Comment 6 Michael Catanzaro 2016-12-13 22:45:12 UTC
Unfortunately no. Feel free to file a bug to restore configurability. We should add user interface as well, so you don't need to edit secret configuration files.
Comment 7 Michael Catanzaro 2016-12-17 03:20:23 UTC
Changed my mind, let's fix this in GNOME 3.22 as well.
Comment 8 Michael Catanzaro 2016-12-17 03:23:20 UTC
The following fixes have been pushed:
0ff60f6 uri-tester: process patterns synchronously at startup
a97da19 uri-tester: Remove commented code
Comment 9 Michael Catanzaro 2016-12-17 03:23:24 UTC
Created attachment 342100 [details] [review]
uri-tester: process patterns synchronously at startup

Currently the URI tester loads filters and patterns asynchronously,
which is racy as it means ads will sometimes not be blocked when a new
web process is loading its first page. Filter processing must always
complete before the first resource is requested, so do it synchronously.

This is already fixed in a better way on the master branch, so this
commit is for GNOME 3.22 only.
Comment 10 Michael Catanzaro 2016-12-17 03:23:27 UTC
Created attachment 342101 [details] [review]
uri-tester: Remove commented code

It's gone from master branch, no point in keeping it around on
gnome-3-22 either.
Comment 11 Michael Catanzaro 2016-12-26 23:00:49 UTC
*** Bug 735309 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***