Bug 1320158

Summary: [abrt] marco: meta_bug(): marco killed by SIGABRT
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Rafal Luzynski <digitalfreak>
Component: marcoAssignee: Wolfgang Ulbrich <fedora>
Status: CLOSED EOL QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity: unspecified Docs Contact:
Priority: unspecified    
Version: 22CC: fedora, yonatan.el.amigo
Target Milestone: ---Keywords: Reopened
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: x86_64   
OS: Unspecified   
URL: https://retrace.fedoraproject.org/faf/reports/bthash/439a679288cec51850e648080e3a2c2eb61ce89d
Whiteboard: abrt_hash:f73bfa685d293554a8dc50f47a6792fa1c56bac7;
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2016-07-19 18:46:40 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Attachments:
Description Flags
File: backtrace
none
File: cgroup
none
File: core_backtrace
none
File: dso_list
none
File: environ
none
File: limits
none
File: maps
none
File: mountinfo
none
File: namespaces
none
File: open_fds
none
File: proc_pid_status
none
File: var_log_messages none

Description Rafal Luzynski 2016-03-22 12:46:33 UTC 
Description of problem:
Probably my custom application made an invalid operation and caused marco to crash. I know that the root reason is in my faulty application but the marco's bug is that it lets a client application crash it.

Version-Release number of selected component:
marco-1.12.1-3.fc22

Additional info:
reporter:       libreport-2.6.4
backtrace_rating: 4
cmdline:        marco
crash_function: meta_bug
executable:     /usr/bin/marco
global_pid:     2090
kernel:         4.4.5-200.fc22.x86_64
runlevel:       N 5
type:           CCpp
uid:            500

Truncated backtrace:
Thread no. 1 (7 frames)
 #2 meta_bug at core/util.c:398
 #3 x_error_handler at core/errors.c:279
 #7 _XEventsQueued at xcb_io.c:364
 #8 XPending at Pending.c:55
 #9 gdk_check_xpending at gdkevents-x11.c:159
 #10 gdk_event_check at gdkevents-x11.c:2400
 #11 g_main_context_check at gmain.c:3649

This is a private, duplicate bug report of bug 1236457. The report has been created because Bugzilla cannot grant access to a comment for a specific group.
Comment 1 Rafal Luzynski 2016-03-22 12:46:38 UTC 
Created attachment 1139044 [details]
File: backtrace
Comment 2 Rafal Luzynski 2016-03-22 12:46:39 UTC 
Created attachment 1139045 [details]
File: cgroup
Comment 3 Rafal Luzynski 2016-03-22 12:46:41 UTC 
Created attachment 1139046 [details]
File: core_backtrace
Comment 4 Rafal Luzynski 2016-03-22 12:46:42 UTC 
Created attachment 1139047 [details]
File: dso_list
Comment 5 Rafal Luzynski 2016-03-22 12:46:44 UTC 
Created attachment 1139048 [details]
File: environ
Comment 6 Rafal Luzynski 2016-03-22 12:46:45 UTC 
Created attachment 1139049 [details]
File: limits
Comment 7 Rafal Luzynski 2016-03-22 12:46:47 UTC 
Created attachment 1139050 [details]
File: maps
Comment 8 Rafal Luzynski 2016-03-22 12:46:49 UTC 
Created attachment 1139051 [details]
File: mountinfo
Comment 9 Rafal Luzynski 2016-03-22 12:46:50 UTC 
Created attachment 1139052 [details]
File: namespaces
Comment 10 Rafal Luzynski 2016-03-22 12:46:52 UTC 
Created attachment 1139053 [details]
File: open_fds
Comment 11 Rafal Luzynski 2016-03-22 12:46:53 UTC 
Created attachment 1139054 [details]
File: proc_pid_status
Comment 12 Rafal Luzynski 2016-03-22 12:46:55 UTC 
Created attachment 1139055 [details]
File: var_log_messages
Comment 13 Rafal Luzynski 2016-03-22 12:46:56 UTC 

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1236457 ***
Comment 14 Wolfgang Ulbrich 2016-03-22 13:33:02 UTC 
How do you think upream can read your report if it is private?
upstream can't read --> no fix --> error is on your box since it die !
Comment 15 Wolfgang Ulbrich 2016-03-22 13:33:23 UTC 
err.... upstream
Comment 16 Rafal Luzynski 2016-03-23 00:18:45 UTC 
Sorry, I thought the core may contain some private data and I did not have time to verify it, also I thought that the bug report may not be valuable as it has been recognized (automatically) as a duplicate. Now I've verified and there's no reason for me to keep it private. I'll be happy to learn that this report turns out to be valuable.

Do not hesitate to ask me more questions, if you need.
Comment 17 Wolfgang Ulbrich 2016-03-23 08:34:49 UTC 
*** Bug 1236457 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 18 Wolfgang Ulbrich 2016-03-23 08:40:42 UTC 
Well, a step to reproduce the crash would be great for upstream.
And do you use compositor?
Comment 19 Rafal Luzynski 2016-03-24 00:18:39 UTC 
No, I don't use a compositor.

It's fully reproducible on my machine but involves some commercial software and I'm not sure it it's appropriate to mention it here as it may be considered an advertisement. I'd like to send you more details by email.
Comment 20 Wolfgang Ulbrich 2016-03-24 00:50:15 UTC 
Ok, can you please open a report directly with all informations?
I'm involved there too, but than developers have all infos to work on it.
https://github.com/mate-desktop/marco/issues
Comment 21 Wolfgang Ulbrich 2016-03-24 00:51:33 UTC 
i meant.....
Ok, can you please open a report directly at github with all informations?
https://github.com/mate-desktop/marco/issues
Comment 22 Fedora End Of Life 2016-07-19 18:46:40 UTC 
Fedora 22 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2016-07-19. Fedora 22 is
no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further
security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug.

If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of
Fedora please feel free to reopen this bug against that version. If you
are unable to reopen this bug, please file a new report against the
current release. If you experience problems, please add a comment to this
bug.

Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed.