Bug 566523

Summary: SIGSEGV in "IA__gtk_accel_groups_activate" running gajim.py
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: alexf <aldafu+fedora>
Component: gajimAssignee: Debarshi Ray <debarshir>
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: low    
Version: 12CC: debarshir, dmalcolm, fedora, ivazqueznet, james.antill, jonathansteffan, mschmidt
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: x86_64   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard: abrt_hash:ed2812cc094e4affa2091c79aea480e1ff7b0c73
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2010-02-18 20:06:44 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 Flags
File: backtrace none

Description alexf 2010-02-18 18:00:21 UTC 
abrt 1.0.6 detected a crash.

architecture: x86_64
Attached file: backtrace
cmdline: /usr/bin/python -OO gajim.py
comment: Upon quiting gajim.
component: python
executable: /usr/bin/python
kernel: 2.6.31.12-174.2.3.fc12.x86_64
package: python-2.6.2-2.fc12
rating: 4
reason: Process was terminated by signal 11 (Segmentation fault)
release: Fedora release 12 (Constantine)
Comment 1 alexf 2010-02-18 18:00:26 UTC 
Created attachment 394957 [details]
File: backtrace
Comment 2 Dave Malcolm 2010-02-18 20:05:23 UTC 
Thank you for reporting this bug.

How reproducible is this problem?  If you run the program from a terminal, is an error message printed?

What is the output of running the following command?
  rpm -q gajim pygtk2 gtk2

Looking at the backtrace, it looks like the problem occurred in the program's single thread in IA__gtk_accel_groups_activate.  However the short length of the backtrace suggests that there was a problem generating the backtrace, so that may not be the true location of the error.

Reassigning component from "python" to "gajim";  hopefully the gajim maintainer will be able to figure this out further or reassign as necessary.
Comment 3 Dave Malcolm 2010-02-18 20:06:44 UTC 

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 544828 ***