Bug 475304

Please attach /tmp/firstboot.* to this bug report.  Thanks.

Created attachment 326195 [details]
firstboot-log

Created attachment 326196 [details]
firstbootX.log.old

Created attachment 326197 [details]
firstbootX.log

This will be fixed in the next build of firstboot.  Thanks for the bug report.

the same for f12, regression?

Please attach the same information as requested previously.

here is no /tmp/first* files.

just run 'sudo firstboot' on your f12 machine and when firstboot asks for server time click Cancel.

python2: xcb_io.c:242: process_responses: Assertion `(((long) (dpy->last_request_read) - (long) (dpy->request)) <= 0)' failed.
python2: xcb_io.c:242: process_responses: Assertion `(((long) (dpy->last_request_read) - (long) (dpy->request)) <= 0)' failed.

(In reply to comment #10)
> python2: xcb_io.c:242: process_responses: Assertion `(((long)
> (dpy->last_request_read) - (long) (dpy->request)) <= 0)' failed.
> python2: xcb_io.c:242: process_responses: Assertion `(((long)
> (dpy->last_request_read) - (long) (dpy->request)) <= 0)' failed.  
Do you have a full backtrace of the failure?

This looks like an assertion failure inside libX11; looks similar to bug 417821; is this a bug in Xnewt serverside?

No, there's nothing more to it than that.

Also there's no Xnewt involved.  I'm just running the regular desktop environment here.

Created attachment 369746 [details]
Backtrace

Backtrace obtained by running
$ gdb python
(gdb) set args /usr/sbin/firstboot
(gdb) run

and hitting Cancel on the NTP connection dialog.

(This backtrace was actually obtained on an F11 laptop)

Also see this message at the terminal:
Gdk-ERROR **: The program 'firstboot' received an X Window System error.
This probably reflects a bug in the program.
The error was 'BadIDChoice (invalid resource ID chosen for this connection)'.
  (Details: serial 6353 error_code 14 request_code 53 minor_code 0)
  (Note to programmers: normally, X errors are reported asynchronously;
   that is, you will receive the error a while after causing it.
   To debug your program, run it with the --sync command line
   option to change this behavior. You can then get a meaningful
   backtrace from your debugger if you break on the gdk_x_error() function.)
aborting...
python: xcb_io.c:242: process_responses: Assertion `(((long) (dpy->last_request_read) - (long) (dpy->request)) <= 0)' failed.
python: xcb_io.c:242: process_responses: Assertion `(((long) (dpy->last_request_read) - (long) (dpy->request)) <= 0)' failed.
Multiple segmentation faults occurred; can't display error dialog

Frame 17 of the backtrace (last point in Python code before it calls back into libgtk) is at:
/usr/share/system-config-date/scdMainWindow.py line 180, which is a call here:
                gtk.mainloop ()
inside the apply() method

and that by clicking on cancel, this code has been invoked:
    def response_cb (self, dialog, response_id, pid):
        if response_id == gtk.RESPONSE_CANCEL:
            os.kill (pid, signal.SIGINT)
        dialog.hide ()

Looks like a bad interaction somewhere between system-config-date, libX11 and libgtk perhaps triggered by killing the child process; reassigning component from "python" to "system-config-date".

Sorry for the late response.

The processes involved are:

firstboot/scdate (parent)
 `--> firstboot/scdate (child)
       `--> /sbin/service ntpd (re)start

In order to kill off the /sbin/service script, scdate simply kills off the forked child process. From the above (comments #10 ... #14), do I need to "disconnect" the child from all gtk/X11 handling? I think not, because the child doesn't do much, especially nothing that would let it interfere with gtk/X11 handling:

            (read, write) = os.pipe ()
            pid = os.fork ()

            if pid == 0:
                signal.signal (signal.SIGCHLD, signal.SIG_DFL)
                # do something slow
                os.close (read)
                time.sleep (2)
                retval = self.dateBackend.startNtpService (None)
                retval = str (retval)
                os.write (write, retval)
                os._exit (0)

Any insights why this should be kept on the system-config-date component? Does anybody see that issue still?

This message is a reminder that Fedora 12 is nearing its end of life.
Approximately 30 (thirty) days from now Fedora will stop maintaining
and issuing updates for Fedora 12.  It is Fedora's policy to close all
bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained.  At that time
this bug will be closed as WONTFIX if it remains open with a Fedora 
'version' of '12'.

Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you
plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version' 
to a later Fedora version prior to Fedora 12's end of life.

Bug Reporter: Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that 
we may not be able to fix it before Fedora 12 is end of life.  If you 
would still like to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it 
against a later version of Fedora please change the 'version' of this 
bug to the applicable version.  If you are unable to change the version, 
please add a comment here and someone will do it for you.

Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's 
lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events.  Often a 
more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes 
bugs or makes them obsolete.

The process we are following is described here: 
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping

Fedora 12 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2010-12-02. Fedora 12 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.

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

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 648050 ***

the bug returned on f15

Please don't reopen a bug closed as duplicate unless you think it's not actually  a duplicate. I've verified that running firstboot, then cancelling the NTP operation shows the issue and mentioned it on bug #648050.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 648050 ***