Bug 602820
Summary: | [abrt] crash in nautilus-2.28.4-2.el6: Process /usr/bin/nautilus was killed by signal 6 (SIGABRT) | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Product: | Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 | Reporter: | Prarit Bhargava <prarit> | ||||
Component: | nautilus | Assignee: | Carlos Soriano <csoriano> | ||||
Status: | CLOSED WONTFIX | QA Contact: | Desktop QE <desktop-qa-list> | ||||
Severity: | urgent | Docs Contact: | |||||
Priority: | low | ||||||
Version: | 6.0 | ||||||
Target Milestone: | rc | ||||||
Target Release: | --- | ||||||
Hardware: | i686 | ||||||
OS: | Linux | ||||||
Whiteboard: | abrt_hash:9b27e997268bba69ee58a7b47c6ec8da775fddb2 | ||||||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | If docs needed, set a value | |||||
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |||||
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||||||
Last Closed: | 2017-12-06 12:18:06 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
Prarit Bhargava
2010-06-10 20:09:08 UTC
Created attachment 423029 [details]
File: backtrace
This request was evaluated by Red Hat Product Management for inclusion in a Red Hat Enterprise Linux major release. Product Management has requested further review of this request by Red Hat Engineering, for potential inclusion in a Red Hat Enterprise Linux Major release. This request is not yet committed for inclusion. This looks like a gtk2 problem from the backtrace:
> ...
> No locals.
> #5 0x00be43b3 in gdk_x_error (display=<value optimized out>,
> error=<value optimized out>) at gdkmain-x11.c:466
> buf =
> "BadAlloc (insufficient resources for operation)", '\000' <repeats 16 times>"\267, "
> msg = <value optimized out>
> #6 0x0072a121 in _XError () from /usr/lib/libX11.so.6
> ...
*** Bug 602819 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** " thousands of file manager windows open up" seems to rather indicate some kind of nautilus problem or operator error. GTK+ can't really do anything against getting an X error if you open up thousands of windows. (In reply to comment #6) > " thousands of file manager windows open up" > > seems to rather indicate some kind of nautilus problem or operator error. > > GTK+ can't really do anything against getting an X error if you open up > thousands of windows. That seems to be some sort of error path. *I* am not opening up thousands of windows. Something is crashing on the desktop and thousands of windows open up as a result. This is a stop-ship as far as I'm concerned. The system is completely unusable. Raising Severity and Priority to match system crash level. P. The X error captured in the stacktrace is just a side-effect of the opening of too many windows. We need to figure out what causes nautilus to crash in a loop for you, if that is what is happening. This issue has been proposed when we are only considering blocker issues in the current Red Hat Enterprise Linux release. It has been denied for the current Red Hat Enterprise Linux release. ** If you would still like this issue considered for the current release, ask your support representative to file as a blocker on your behalf. Otherwise ask that it be considered for the next Red Hat Enterprise Linux release. ** Moving to nautilus, which is the application that is crashing in a loop here. There is no indication that gtk is substantially involved here, apart from being the unlucky library that ends up on top of the stacktrace, due to having an X error handler. (In reply to comment #7) > That seems to be some sort of error path. *I* am not opening up thousands of > windows. Something is crashing on the desktop and thousands of windows open up > as a result. Prarit, can you give us some repro steps? How did you manage to get your system in this state? Nautilus remembers open windows in some situation and is trying to restore them on startup. By trigerring some issue we might end up in recursion, adding one more window in every iteration. I tend to think this comes from some extension, can you please try to disable/uninstall them one by one ending with a clean Nautilus? Does this happen with new user? (In reply to comment #14) > (In reply to comment #7) > > That seems to be some sort of error path. *I* am not opening up thousands of > > windows. Something is crashing on the desktop and thousands of windows open up > > as a result. > Prarit, can you give us some repro steps? How did you manage to get your system > in this state? I wish I had a reproducer :( ... but I don't have one. This occurs on my work desktop about once or twice a month. I usually have to shut down X and restart it in order to recover. > > Nautilus remembers open windows in some situation and is trying to restore them > on startup. By trigerring some issue we might end up in recursion, adding one > more window in every iteration. > > I tend to think this comes from some extension, can you please try to > disable/uninstall them one by one ending with a clean Nautilus? Does this > happen with new user? Sure, I'll give that a shot -- but FYI, I'm using the *stock* RHEL6 install. I am not adding any additional features. Also, I'm the only user of the system (two accounts, root & prarit). [Aside: I hate getting bug reports like this too ;). There's not enough info in this BZ unfortunately....] Is there anyone in *Westford* that I can grab the next time this happens so they can take a look? P. (In reply to comment #15) > I wish I had a reproducer :( ... but I don't have one. This occurs on my work > desktop about once or twice a month. I usually have to shut down X and restart > it in order to recover. Weird, this looks like it has something to do with hardware, e.g. plugged devices. But I can't imagine why nautilus segfaults in that case. When there's something wrong, a layer behind crashes, that is gvfs in this case. Besides these abrt reports, are there any other segfaults in dmesg? Does it happen right after login or during work? > Is there anyone in *Westford* that I can grab the next time this happens so > they can take a look? Try Matthias Clasen or Ray Strode, they might give you more clues based on immediate experience. This could be a session issue too.
>
> > Is there anyone in *Westford* that I can grab the next time this happens so
> > they can take a look?
>
> Try Matthias Clasen or Ray Strode, they might give you more clues based on
> immediate experience. This could be a session issue too.
Tomas,
Next time this happens I'll run downstairs and see if I can grab either of them to come up and take a look.
I'm going to move the priority of this BZ to "low".
P.
Since RHEL 6.3 External Beta has begun, and this bug remains unresolved, it has been rejected as it is not proposed as exception or blocker. Red Hat invites you to ask your support representative to propose this request, if appropriate and relevant, in the next release of Red Hat Enterprise Linux. Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 is in the Production 3 Phase. During the Production 3 Phase, Critical impact Security Advisories (RHSAs) and selected Urgent Priority Bug Fix Advisories (RHBAs) may be released as they become available. The official life cycle policy can be reviewed here: http://redhat.com/rhel/lifecycle This issue does not meet the inclusion criteria for the Production 3 Phase and will be marked as CLOSED/WONTFIX. If this remains a critical requirement, please contact Red Hat Customer Support to request a re-evaluation of the issue, citing a clear business justification. Note that a strong business justification will be required for re-evaluation. Red Hat Customer Support can be contacted via the Red Hat Customer Portal at the following URL: https://access.redhat.com/ |