Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 1032985
With heavy load skip lookup account details doesn't
Last modified: 2015-05-28 04:25:59 EDT
Created attachment 827129 [details]
screenshot of the dialog
Description of problem:
I am refreshing my main RH mail account (multi-gigabyte enterprise) and when adding as a second account my personal one, I get bogged on "Lookup Account Details" dialog. I tried to skip that lookup (which doesn't make much sense anyway, because details of my personal IMAP server won't be found anyway).
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
Steps to Reproduce:
Created attachment 827156 [details]
What's even better, that after some time of running the lookup account details wizard, whole evolution crashed with this backtrace.
Where's the upstream bug report for this?
This request was not resolved in time for the current release.
Red Hat invites you to ask your support representative to
propose this request, if still desired, for consideration in
the next release of Red Hat Enterprise Linux.
Please retest with evolution 3.12.11-1, once it's available and report back.
It'll also help to run evolution from a terminal first, then see what it prints there. I recall a libsoup message which was something about freeing a soup structure which is still in use, which could later lead to a crash. I think the trick was to click the Skip Lookup quick enough, right after the lookup started.
Created attachment 1030120 [details]
output of CAMEL_DEBUG=all evolution
It seems like it is working fine with evolution-3.12.11-2.el7.x86_64
Okay, thanks for the testing. I really didn't ask for a 97.5MB log, I asked for a plain console output, where can be shown things from libsoup in time of clicking the "Skip Lookup", which sometimes did that when the button was pressed quickly enough. Such issue belongs to libsoup, which I do not follow closely, thus it might, or might not, be fixed in libsoup-2.48.1-3.el7.
(In reply to Milan Crha from comment #9)
> Okay, thanks for the testing. I really didn't ask for a 97.5MB log, I asked
I always believed that there is no such thing as too much information. Perhaps, this is the first case?
(In reply to Matěj Cepl from comment #10)
> Perhaps, this is the first case?
In this case, it is :)