Bug 407051 (youtube-ff-crash)
Summary: | Gecko Crashes Firefox | ||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Brad Longo <brad.longo> | ||||||||||
Component: | nspluginwrapper | Assignee: | Gecko Maintainer <gecko-bugs-nobody> | ||||||||||
Status: | CLOSED DUPLICATE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> | ||||||||||
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |||||||||||
Priority: | low | ||||||||||||
Version: | 8 | CC: | alex, dmitryburstein, linux, lpoetter, mcepl, nyman.jonas, wtogami | ||||||||||
Target Milestone: | --- | ||||||||||||
Target Release: | --- | ||||||||||||
Hardware: | i686 | ||||||||||||
OS: | Linux | ||||||||||||
Whiteboard: | |||||||||||||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |||||||||||
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |||||||||||
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||||||||||||
Last Closed: | 2008-02-05 09:45:47 UTC | Type: | --- | ||||||||||
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- | ||||||||||
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |||||||||||
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |||||||||||
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |||||||||||
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |||||||||||
Embargoed: | |||||||||||||
Attachments: |
|
Description
Brad Longo
2007-12-01 00:12:17 UTC
Created attachment 274571 [details]
Bug Report
Does installing libflashsupport help? Is libflashsupport provided by adobe? I have adobe flash player, and last time I downloaded something in the repos that did the same thing they conflicted with each other. I have recently been getting other error messages from ndiswrapper so I just removed it because I don't really need it. It seems firefox is just a mess. After I did that I got an error message from gecko again so its still there. (In reply to comment #3) > Is libflashsupport provided by adobe? [matej@hubmaier ~]$ sudo yum list libflashsupport Heslo: Sorry, try again. Heslo: Loading "changelog" plugin Loading "versionlock" plugin Loading "downloadonly" plugin Loading "basearchonly" plugin Loading "protectbase" plugin Loading "allowdowngrade" plugin Loading "security" plugin Loading "skip-broken" plugin Loading "priorities" plugin Excluding Packages in global exclude list Finished Reading version lock configuration 0 packages excluded due to repository protections 0 packages excluded due to repository priority protections Installed Packages libflashsupport.i386 000-0.2.svn20070904 installed libflashsupport.x86_64 000-0.2.svn20070904 installed [matej@hubmaier ~]$ No, it is in Fedora. Hi. I have the same problem and I have a feeling its pulseaudio-related too: the crash only happens on audio-enables flash items (not every time, but ONLY on audio, and NEVER on one without a sound track). It never happened in F7 - before pulse. I have the same version of libflashsupport, and 9.0.115.0 version of flash-plugin, taken from adobe repository. I did try to run a git version of libflashsupport from pulseaudio's site (locally compiled), but the crashes continued. I am experiencing the same thing. Firefox often crashes when I try to view videos on YouTube. I get the gecko-crash bug-reporting-tool-thing... However, I believe I have found a pattern. Firefox/gecko crashes if I scroll down on the page simultaneously as the video is loading. If I only click on the video to play it and letting it load, not changing window size or scrolling, it does not crash. I do not know if this is significant, but it is something I think I have observed. Further... If I restart Firefox and choose "Restore last session", and view the same video, it will not crash! Using firefox-2.0.0.10-3.fc8 libflashsupport-000-0.1.svn20070904 flash-plugin-9.0.115.0-release Created attachment 290628 [details]
gecko-bugreport
The bugreport created by gecko bug reporting tool.
Duplicate of 426860 and more... *** Bug 426860 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** *** Bug 379271 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** Created attachment 291879 [details]
gdb output as commented
Same problem here. As additional info, I attach the gdb output after
installation of firefox-debuginfo.
My packages are:
firefox-2.0.0.10-3.fc8
libflashsupport-000-0.1.svn20070904
flash-plugin-9.0.115.0-release from Adobe
Created attachment 291951 [details]
from bug buddy
Possibly one of the nspluginwrapper bugs. Also, I see google toolbar which could be causing it. Sending to nspluginwrapper for now. Not in my case: I'm running 32-bit - no nspluginwrapper. Same here, i686, no nspluginwrapper installed. And I don't have google toolbar. I had same problem and submitted a similar bug report. I tried every suggestion I could find. What worked was to remove firefox rpm and then yum install firefox. It has not missed a frame since..I am on firefox 2.0.0.10 on FC8 32bit. Unfortunately, in my case even after "rpm -e --nodeps firefox && yum -y install firefox" it is still unstable in the same way :-( Duplicate of 429657 and 397641 too..? I had gnash and gnash-plugin installed. With those installed, I did no longer get the firefox-gecko-crash. However, I could never see any movie with gnash. I removed gnash and re-installed adobe's flash-plugin-9.0.115.0-release Now I can see movies but often get the gecko crash. W (In reply to comment #18) > I had gnash and gnash-plugin installed. With those installed, I did no longer > get the firefox-gecko-crash. However, I could never see any movie with gnash. > > I removed gnash and re-installed adobe's > flash-plugin-9.0.115.0-release > > Now I can see movies but often get the gecko crash. Try swfdec\* from the development repository (yum --enablerepo=development install swfdec\*). You will need all gstreamer packages, even those which are not available in the official Fedora repository. duplicate of 365861? It seems this and similar or somehow related bugs are reported in so many bug reports. Would it be possible to close all but one and copy all info from the different bugs into that single one? Why is nspluginwrapper the Component of this bug? Why is the priority of this bug low, when very similar bugs have high prio? Shouldn't the priority be higher when we can assume _a lot_ of people are experiencing the bug? (In reply to comment #20) > duplicate of 365861? Well, yes, I was trying to keep them separate until we know what's going on, but I will fold them now into one. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 365861 *** |