Description of problem: When trying to start any open office application, a segmentation fault happens. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): openoffice.org-calc.i386 1:2.0.2-5.9.2 openoffice.org-core.i386 1:2.0.2-5.9.2 openoffice.org-draw.i386 1:2.0.2-5.9.2 openoffice.org-graphicfilter.i386 1:2.0.2-5.9.2 openoffice.org-impress.i386 1:2.0.2-5.9.2 openoffice.org-math.i386 1:2.0.2-5.9.2 openoffice.org-writer.i386 1:2.0.2-5.9.2 openoffice.org-xsltfilter.i386 1:2.0.2-5.9.2 kernel 2.6.16-1.2111_FC5-x86_64 How reproducible: it happens all the time on 2 machines with the same configuration. This thread (www.redhat.com/archives/rhl-list/2005-November/msg00515.html) mentions the same problem. Steps to Reproduce: 1. start any open office application Actual results: [francois@flims ~]$ oowriter /usr/lib/openoffice.org2.0/program/soffice: line 151: 2927 Segmentation fault "$sd_prog/$sd_binary" "$@" The following logs in /var/log/message: May 16 14:13:53 flims kernel: IA32 syscall 311 from javaldx not implemented May 16 14:13:53 flims kernel: IA32 syscall 311 from swriter.bin not implemented May 16 14:13:54 flims kernel: swriter.bin[2927]: segfault at 0000000000000000 rip 0000000000000000 rsp 00000000ffff8e44 error 14q Expected results: open office application would start Additional info: This post (http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/1/23/347) seems to be related to this problem. There are indeed no IA32 syscall 311 defined when I look in my kernel source (/usr/src/kernels/2.6.16-1.2111_FC5-x86_64/include/asm-x86_64/ia32_unistd.h) This is would likely be a consquence of this bug 191565 (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191565).
how long has this been happening for you, I've never heard of this problem all through the FC-5 development cycle, did it just start to happen with the 2111 kernel ?
This has always happened with those 2 machines (I only have the 2096 and 2111 kernel on it), as far as I can remember. I have another machine which is based on the same configuration (cloned the other 2 weeks or so ago) and almost identical hardware, but is not updated quite as often (but they share the same kernel and openoffice) in which openoffice works without any problems.
And to be sure, what is the output of /usr/sbin/sestatus on the non-working vs working machines.
I did not change anything regarding selinux on them: Open office non-working: [francois@flims ~]$ /usr/sbin/sestatus SELinux status: enabled SELinuxfs mount: /selinux Current mode: enforcing Mode from config file: enforcing Policy version: 20 Policy from config file: targeted Open office working: [francois@lars ~]$ /usr/sbin/sestatus SELinux status: enabled SELinuxfs mount: /selinux Current mode: enforcing Mode from config file: enforcing Policy version: 20 Policy from config file: targeted I also just did an update and it stopped working on both. I was probably wrong about it never working on the non-working machine. Would it be due to the selinux or the glibc update? Updating: NetworkManager x86_64 0.6.2-2.fc5 updates 388 k NetworkManager-glib x86_64 0.6.2-2.fc5 updates 25 k NetworkManager-gnome x86_64 0.6.2-2.fc5 updates 170 k abiword x86_64 1:2.4.4-4.fc5 extras 6.1 M beagle x86_64 0.2.6-1.fc5.1 updates 1.3 M cups x86_64 1:1.2.0-1.1 updates 2.6 M cups-libs x86_64 1:1.2.0-1.1 updates 165 k cups-libs i386 1:1.2.0-1.1 updates 170 k dosfstools x86_64 2.11-5.FC5 updates 47 k firefox x86_64 1.5.0.3-1.1.fc5 updates 16 M glibc i686 2.4-8 updates 4.9 M glibc x86_64 2.4-8 updates 4.6 M glibc-common x86_64 2.4-8 updates 16 M glibc-devel i386 2.4-8 updates 1.9 M glibc-devel x86_64 2.4-8 updates 2.4 M glibc-headers x86_64 2.4-8 updates 594 k hpijs x86_64 1:0.9.11-1.1 updates 174 k hplip x86_64 0.9.11-1.1 updates 6.7 M libbeagle x86_64 0.2.6-1.fc5.1 updates 35 k libsane-hpaio x86_64 0.9.11-1.1 updates 115 k nscd x86_64 2.4-8 updates 143 k sane-backends x86_64 1.0.17-5.fc5.9 updates 3.0 M selinux-policy noarch 2.2.38-1.fc5 updates 468 k selinux-policy-targeted noarch 2.2.38-1.fc5 updates 461 k tzdata noarch 2006g-1.fc5 updates 488 k vnc x86_64 4.1.1-37.fc5 updates 159 k vnc-server x86_64 4.1.1-37.fc5 updates 1.2 M wpa_supplicant x86_64 1:0.4.8-10.fc5 updates 242 k Installing for dependencies: gnutls i386 1.2.10-1 core 332 k I tried to disable selinux using system-config-securitylevel, but it still gives me the same error on both machines. sestatus output then: SELinux status: enabled SELinuxfs mount: /selinux Current mode: permissive Mode from config file: disabled Policy version: 20 Policy from config file: targeted
My leading contender for the culprit is glibc or kernel :-)
*** Bug 192181 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
I think it might be a problem with both the kernel and glibc together. I finally got to reboot one of the computer with kernel 2096 and I can use open office properly on it. Is there anything else for us to do but go back to the old kernel and hope for the best with the next update?
Folks, I had been able to use openoffice with earlier kernels also, but I went back to 2096, and I still get a segfault in startup. (I'm at 2111 also right now). I'm the person who called in but 192181 above, and other than not having luck with going back to 2096, this does look like a duplicate of what I've got. My glibc's are: glibc-common-2.4-8 glibc-headers-2.4-8 glibc-2.4-8 glibc-kernheaders-3.0-5.2 glibc-devel-2.4-8 glibc-2.4-8 glibc-devel-2.4-8 And I've tried both 2096 and 2111 kernels, and neither will work. Just for completeness, I've got kernels: kernel-smp-devel-2.6.16-1.2069_FC4 kernel-smp-devel-2.6.15-1.1833_FC4 kernel-debuginfo-2.6.16-1.2111_FC5 kernel-doc-2.6.16-1.2111_FC5 kernel-2.6.16-1.2096_FC5 kernel-2.6.16-1.2107_FC5 kernel-2.6.16-1.2111_FC5 kernel-devel-2.6.16-1.2096_FC5 kernel-devel-2.6.15-1.1833_FC4 kernel-2.6.15-1.2054_FC5 kernel-devel-2.6.16-1.2069_FC4 kernel-devel-2.6.16-1.2107_FC5 kernel-devel-2.6.16-1.2111_FC5
A new kernel update has been released (Version: 2.6.18-1.2200.fc5) based upon a new upstream kernel release. Please retest against this new kernel, as a large number of patches go into each upstream release, possibly including changes that may address this problem. This bug has been placed in NEEDINFO state. Due to the large volume of inactive bugs in bugzilla, if this bug is still in this state in two weeks time, it will be closed. Should this bug still be relevant after this period, the reporter can reopen the bug at any time. Any other users on the Cc: list of this bug can request that the bug be reopened by adding a comment to the bug. In the last few updates, some users upgrading from FC4->FC5 have reported that installing a kernel update has left their systems unbootable. If you have been affected by this problem please check you only have one version of device-mapper & lvm2 installed. See bug 207474 for further details. If this bug is a problem preventing you from installing the release this version is filed against, please see bug 169613. If this bug has been fixed, but you are now experiencing a different problem, please file a separate bug for the new problem. Thank you.
Folks, I just installed the kernel (kernel-2.6.18-1.2200.fc5) and tried oowriter and oocalc. It still doesn't work! I get ------------------ oowriter results ------------------------------------------- /usr/lib/openoffice.org2.0/program/soffice: line 151: 4921 Segmentation fault "$sd_prog/$sd_binary" "$@" ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Just to be clear about what I've got, it's fc5, on a dual opteron, with the uname -a returning: ---------------------- uname -a results --------------------------------------- Linux kyzyl 2.6.18-1.2200.fc5 #1 SMP Sat Oct 14 16:59:56 EDT 2006 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ rpm -q on openoffice.org-writer returns ----------------- rpm -q openoffice.org-writer results ----------------------- openoffice.org-writer-2.0.2-5.19.2 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- And my glibc rpms are: -------------- rpm -qa glibc\* results ----------------------------------------- glibc-common-2.4-11 glibc-2.4-11 glibc-kernheaders-3.0-5.2 glibc-headers-2.4-11 glibc-devel-2.4-11 glibc-2.4-11 glibc-devel-2.4-11 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A final note which may or may not be relevant, is that I'm running with the ati-fglrx X hardware accelerator driver (kmod-fglrx-8.29.6-1.2.6.18_1.2200.fc5).
I'm puzzled what's actually going on here. syscall 311 is 'get_robust_list', which isn't *that* old, so ooffice should have a fallback if this doesn't succeed. Why it's segfaulting is a mystery. Unless there's a kernel oops in dmesg output though after that segv, it's likely either an ooffice or glibc problem.
Fedora apologizes that these issues have not been resolved yet. We're sorry it's taken so long for your bug to be properly triaged and acted on. We appreciate the time you took to report this issue and want to make sure no important bugs slip through the cracks. If you're currently running a version of Fedora Core between 1 and 6, please note that Fedora no longer maintains these releases. We strongly encourage you to upgrade to a current Fedora release. In order to refocus our efforts as a project we are flagging all of the open bugs for releases which are no longer maintained and closing them. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/LifeCycle/EOL If this bug is still open against Fedora Core 1 through 6, thirty days from now, it will be closed 'WONTFIX'. If you can reporduce this bug in the latest Fedora version, please change to the respective version. If you are unable to do this, please add a comment to this bug requesting the change. Thanks for your help, and we apologize again that we haven't handled these issues to this point. The process we are following is outlined here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/F9CleanUp We will be following the process here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping to ensure this doesn't happen again. And if you'd like to join the bug triage team to help make things better, check out http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers
This bug is open for a Fedora version that is no longer maintained and will not be fixed by Fedora. Therefore we are closing this bug. If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of Fedora please feel free to reopen thus bug against that version. Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed.