Bug 638346

Summary: [abrt] gvfs-1.6.2-1.fc13: g_vfs_job_emit_finished: Process /usr/libexec/gvfsd-sftp was killed by signal 11 (SIGSEGV)
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Benjamin Otte <otte>
Component: gvfsAssignee: Tomáš Bžatek <tbzatek>
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: low    
Version: 13CC: alexl, bnocera, tbzatek, tsmetana
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: x86_64   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard: abrt_hash:4a57f27b442e4ccc7b38a2010baf5f3dc92832f1
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2010-11-09 13:20:50 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 Benjamin Otte 2010-09-28 19:51:33 UTC
abrt version: 1.1.13
architecture: x86_64
Attached file: backtrace
cmdline: /usr/libexec/gvfsd-sftp --spawner :1.7 /org/gtk/gvfs/exec_spaw/5
component: gvfs
crash_function: g_vfs_job_emit_finished
executable: /usr/libexec/gvfsd-sftp
kernel: 2.6.34.6-54.fc13.x86_64
package: gvfs-1.6.2-1.fc13
rating: 4
reason: Process /usr/libexec/gvfsd-sftp was killed by signal 11 (SIGSEGV)
release: Fedora release 13 (Goddard)
time: 1285699210
uid: 500

How to reproduce
-----
1. Navigate to SFTP share in Nautilus
2. Double-click a file in Totem
3. be lucky
It only happened the first time I tried to play the file. The second time the file opened fine but Totem complained that it wasn't seekable.
I can get you the file if you care.

Comment 1 Benjamin Otte 2010-09-28 19:51:36 UTC
Created attachment 450295 [details]
File: backtrace

Comment 2 Karel Klíč 2010-11-09 13:20:50 UTC

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 630757 ***

Comment 3 Karel Klíč 2010-11-09 13:20:50 UTC
This bug appears to have been filled using a buggy version of ABRT, because
it contains a backtrace which is a duplicate of backtrace from bug #630757.

Sorry for the inconvenience.