Fork me on GitHub
Get XOOPS XOOPSXOOPS FAQFAQ ForumsForums NewsNews ThemesThemes ModulesModules
New Posts New Topics All Posts All Forums Index General Modules Themes Development International XOOPS.org

Search

Nominate XOOPS!

Learn XOOPS Core

Donat-O-Meter

Make donations with PayPal!
Stats
Goal: $100.00
Due Date: Jul 31
Gross Amount: $15.00
Net Balance: $14.11
Left to go: $85.89

Donations
Anonymous ($15)Jul-20

Local Support

Advertisement

XOOPS Code hosted on SourceForge

Cumulus Tag Cloud

- 2 2.5 2.6 3.0 4 6 2013 Abuse adslight Android AntiHarvesting AntiMalUser AntiSpam API Apple Battlefield billige Bootstrap Captcha cell chronolabs Clicks content CĂN demo docek download Dresses evden eve facebook Fat floor Food for free Gateway Google Guide herre Home Honeypot HP Human HỘ IP iPhone jQuery Language List log Loss mobile module modules Monster new newbb news NHÀ online PARK phone PHP Prevention profile project Protector publisher Rapid RESIDENCE responsive review Rights rmcommon security Sentry site Smartphone Smoking Solution Spam stem Studio tags tdmcreate template The Theme themes web weight Wishcraft xoops Xortify XPayment ZendFramework

New Users

Registering user

# 137636

mzmaker05

Welcome to XOOPS!

Tags: xoopscode  



Bottom   Previous Topic   Next Topic  Register To Post



#1 Posted on: 2012/8/23 1:50 Possible bug in textsanitizer in xoops 2.5.5 (maybe in previous versions too)
I have just upgraded my localhost site from 2.5.0 to 2.5.5 and I have possibly found a bug in textsanitizer with nested xoopcodes. I tried the same here in this forum and the result is the same:

if I nest a "img" xcode inside a "url" xcode the url breaks.

Here is my example:
[url=http://www.iecscyl.com/textos/Tr%EDptico%20II%20Curso%20de%20Ecograf%EDa%20Avanzada%20de%20Tiroides.pdf]
[img]http://www.iecscyl.com/uploads/img437c3b1ae7a8c.gif[/img]  
Folleto Informativo.[/url]


My online site still uses 2.5.0 and the previous code works fine, here is a link:
https://www.iecscyl.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=358

Thank you for your help!!

Top

mondarse
Just popping in
Just popping in
Joined:
2003/2/3 4:49
From Spain
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 78
(Show More) (Show Less)


#2 Posted on: 2012/8/23 2:18 Re: Possible bug in textsanitizer in xoops 2.5.5 (maybe in previous versions too)
very nice catch!
thank you.
Also i test in 2.6.0 alpha and it is a bug in that version too.
please send it to the bug tracker.
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=41586&atid=430840

then mention that it is a bug in 2.5.5 and 2.6.0 alpha 1

Edit:
I found it is because of CaricFoto js enable in file class/textsanitizer/image/config.php
// Click to open an image in a new window in full size using CaricFoto
    
'clickable' => 1,


set it to 0 and it will correctly show the link.

1- these kind of configs should be moved to database in the 2.6.0
2- with CaricFoto enable it still should show the link? is this a bug?
3- what is the benefit of CaricFoto?



Top

irmtfan
Module Developer
Module Developer
Joined:
2003/12/7 14:14
From In the middle of nowhere
Group:
Registered Users
Community Coordinator (temporary)
Posts: 3367
(Show More) (Show Less)


#3 Posted on: 2012/8/23 3:00 Re: Possible bug in textsanitizer in xoops 2.5.5 (maybe in previous versions too)
Thank you very much for your quick solution. I have set 'clickable' => 0, and worked fine.

After your "edit" I don't understand if I should submit a bug in tracker or you have already sent by yourself, or if it can't be considered a bug.

MonDarSE

Top

mondarse
Just popping in
Just popping in
Joined:
2003/2/3 4:49
From Spain
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 78
(Show More) (Show Less)


#4 Posted on: 2012/8/24 3:04 Re: Possible bug in textsanitizer in xoops 2.5.5 (maybe in previous versions too)
As I had no response if I should report the bug to SF, I have searched bug tracker in SF and as I found no report I have done it myself.

Thank you irmtfan again for your quick and useful fix.

Top

mondarse
Just popping in
Just popping in
Joined:
2003/2/3 4:49
From Spain
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 78
(Show More) (Show Less)


#5 Posted on: 2012/8/24 3:38 Re: Possible bug in textsanitizer in xoops 2.5.5 (maybe in previous versions too)
mondarse:
I didnt respond because generally my connection to the internet in thursdays and fridays are limited.
sending the bug to the tracker is good.
but more importantly i need to know if we need that CaricFoto in 2.6.0?
IMO core team can remove this feature totally

Top

irmtfan
Module Developer
Module Developer
Joined:
2003/12/7 14:14
From In the middle of nowhere
Group:
Registered Users
Community Coordinator (temporary)
Posts: 3367
(Show More) (Show Less)


#6 Posted on: 2012/8/24 7:17 Re: Possible bug in textsanitizer in xoops 2.5.5 (maybe in previous versions too)
Quote:

but more importantly i need to know if we need that CaricFoto in 2.6.0?
IMO core team can remove this feature totally


I agree. IMO CaricaFoto brings a little outdated way to creating pop-up windows.
http://translate.googleusercontent.co ... 4VkZ-ru1hPIPULEzr2mOs3EWA
There are more unobstructive methods to do such things nowadays.

Top

bumciach
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk
Joined:
2007/6/25 6:14
From Poland
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 153
(Show More) (Show Less)


#7 Posted on: 2013/1/13 14:53 Re: Possible bug in textsanitizer in xoops 2.5.5 (maybe in previous versions too)
After a core update I today ran into this problem, like several times before. Had to edit the config file again... I agree, please remove this annoying CaricFoto script asap!

Top


The Dutch speaking XOOPS community has moved!
____________________________________

For Dutch support now go to www.nlxoops.nl
flipse
Moderator
Moderator
Joined:
2005/9/15 4:11
From The Netherlands
Group:
Registered Users
Community Coordinator (temporary)
Posts: 746
(Show More) (Show Less)







You can view topic.
You cannot start a new topic.
You cannot reply to posts.
You cannot edit your posts.
You cannot delete your posts.
You cannot add new polls.
You cannot vote in polls.
You cannot attach files to posts.
You cannot post without approval.
You cannot use topic type.
You cannot use HTML syntax.
You cannot use signature.

[Advanced Search]