Closed (fixed)
Project:
Exif
Version:
7.x-1.1
Component:
Code
Priority:
Normal
Category:
Bug report
Assigned:
Reporter:
Created:
30 Jun 2011 at 18:58 UTC
Updated:
9 Aug 2011 at 19:01 UTC
Hi,
We get the following notice on a site
Notice: Undefined index: module in _exif_handle_field() (line 216 of exif.module)
The module is just not set in:
$field_type['display']['default']['module']
Consequently:
_exif_handle_text_field($index,$language,$field_type,$field_data,$exif_section,$exif_name,$exif_value);
or
_exif_handle_taxonomy_field($index,$language,$field_type,$field_data,$exif_section,$exif_name,$exif_value);
are never called and such also not updated.
The fields have been created via GUI and have type text. We are running 7.4.
Is there an error in our setup or is this a bug?
Thank you very much for the nice module.
Best Wishes,
Fabian
Comments
Comment #1
jphautin commentedThe module has been tested with 7.0 and 7.2 successfully without this notice. I Must check the 7.4 version.
Comment #2
jphautin commentedok. I reproduce the issue on with test simpletest suite on durpal 7.4. This is clearly due to the changes between drupal 7.2 and 7.4.
Comment #3
jphautin commentedI am sorry but I was wrong.
I do have an issue with version 1.1 of the module and drupal 7.4 but this is not the same as yours.
I have an notice on line 587 of exif.module (Undefined index: 0).
I make the correction on head but this will not help you as I am working on media integration and the code still raised some warnings.
I check the missing value that you indicate. It is an object created and provided to the module by the drupal core.
I can not explain myself how this $field_type['display']['default']['module'] value is missing. There must always be a default display set for a field type. It should be impossible to save a instance of a field without this value.
Can you run the simpletest suite on your environnement and send me the result ? Or, can you provide a step by step scenario.
Comment #4
jphautin commentedcorrected in head version. please review.
Comment #5
tomogden commentedConfirmed, the error for line 587 is corrected in the -dev version.