Bug 575393 - [abrt] crash in thunderbird-3.0.3-1.fc12: Process /usr/lib/thunderbird-3.0/thunderbird-bin was killed by signal 11 (SIGSEGV)
[abrt] crash in thunderbird-3.0.3-1.fc12: Process /usr/lib/thunderbird-3.0/th...
Status: CLOSED WONTFIX
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: thunderbird (Show other bugs)
12
i686 Linux
low Severity medium
: ---
: ---
Assigned To: Gecko Maintainer
Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
abrt_hash:fc0c800b04551235fedfecd7276...
:
Depends On:
Blocks:
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2010-03-20 10:01 EDT by Mads Kiilerich
Modified: 2010-12-03 12:01 EST (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2010-12-03 12:01:29 EST
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
CRM:
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---


Attachments (Terms of Use)
File: backtrace (35.05 KB, text/plain)
2010-03-20 10:01 EDT, Mads Kiilerich
no flags Details

  None (edit)
Description Mads Kiilerich 2010-03-20 10:01:42 EDT
abrt 1.0.8 detected a crash.

architecture: i686
Attached file: backtrace
cmdline: /usr/lib/thunderbird-3.0/thunderbird-bin
comment: after "debuginfo-install thunderbird" - do that make any difference?
component: thunderbird
executable: /usr/lib/thunderbird-3.0/thunderbird-bin
kernel: 2.6.32.9-70.fc12.i686.PAE
package: thunderbird-3.0.3-1.fc12
rating: 4
reason: Process /usr/lib/thunderbird-3.0/thunderbird-bin was killed by signal 11 (SIGSEGV)
release: Fedora release 12 (Constantine)
Comment 1 Mads Kiilerich 2010-03-20 10:01:44 EDT
Created attachment 401435 [details]
File: backtrace
Comment 2 Mads Kiilerich 2010-03-20 10:03:42 EDT
As requested on bug 575030 comment 3
Comment 3 Mads Kiilerich 2010-03-20 10:54:34 EDT
The crash was reproducible, but after a reboot (which also disabled AT) it works fine again.
Comment 4 Chris Campbell 2010-03-20 14:22:42 EDT
Actually, it looks like your problem is the same as 575030. However, the fact remains that with out the symbolic stack trace... WE CAN NOT TROUBLESHOOT.

Be that as it may, since you did not like my handling of the other bug, which was as per our guidelines, I will ask for some additional information in the next comment. Please do what it says and provide us with that information AND a useful set of steps we can use to reliably reproduce this crash. 

Thank you VERY much for your extra efforts. In advance.



-- 
Fedora Bugzappers volunteer triage team
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers
Comment 5 Chris Campbell 2010-03-20 14:23:25 EDT
Thank you for taking the time to submit this bug report.

We have reviewed the information you have provided above, and there is some additional information we require that will be helpful in our diagnosis of this issue.

First of all, could we get output of the command, saved in a text file and attached to this bug:

 $ rpm -qa *thunderbird* *mozilla* *flash* *plugin*

Please also install thunderbird-debuginfo.

 # debuginfo-install thunderbird

Then run thunderbird inside the gdb debugger. Please do the following:

 $ thunderbird -g

Stuff will appear. Ignore this until you get the gdb command prompt, then do:

 (gdb) run

Now, thunderbird should start up. Use it and reproduce the crash. When thunderbird crashes, you should be back to the gdb prompt. Now do:

 (gdb) thread apply all back-trace

More screens of stuff will occur. Copy all of this part to your editor of choice, such as gedit, and save it as an uncompressed file and attach it to this bug report.

We will review this issue again once you've had a chance to attach this information.



-- 
Fedora Bugzappers volunteer triage team
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers
Comment 6 Mads Kiilerich 2010-03-20 21:12:50 EDT
(In reply to comment #4)
> Actually, it looks like your problem is the same as 575030. However, the fact
> remains that with out the symbolic stack trace... WE CAN NOT TROUBLESHOOT.

Yes, it is the same crash as 575030, but after the "debuginfo-install thunderbird" you requested. It surprised me that the result was a different hash and thus a new report, but here it is.
 
> Be that as it may, since you did not like my handling of the other bug, which
> was as per our guidelines,

I'm sorry if it came out as a personal critique - that was in no way intended. My focus was on getting this issue solved - and improve tools and methods and Fedora in genereral.

However:

Abrt automates (and virtualizes) the debuginfo-install step, so FWIW I don't think the "debuginfo, please" response should be used on abrt reports. If abrt doesn't do it properly then it is an abrt bug. Perhaps the guidelines could be clarified - or just used with care.

Though permitted by the guidelines it is IMHO a bit aggressive to close with INSUFFICIENT_DATA immediately after requesting more info. The guidelines suggests setting "needinfo" flag instead.

(In reply to comment #5)
> First of all, could we get output of the command, saved in a text file and
> attached to this bug:
> 
>  $ rpm -qa *thunderbird* *mozilla* *flash* *plugin*

The relevant parts:
flash-plugin-10.0.45.2-release.i386
java-1.6.0-openjdk-plugin-1.6.0.0-36.b17.fc12.i686
mozilla-filesystem-1.9-5.fc12.i686
nspluginwrapper-1.3.0-10.fc12.i686
PackageKit-browser-plugin-0.5.7-1.fc12.i686
thunderbird-3.0.3-1.fc12.i686

perhaps more relevant:
$ rpm -qf /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins/*
file /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins/libflashplayer.so is not owned by any package
file /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins/libjavaplugin.so is not owned by any package
rhythmbox-0.12.6-5.fc12.i686
PackageKit-browser-plugin-0.5.7-1.fc12.i686

> Please also install thunderbird-debuginfo.
> 
>  # debuginfo-install thunderbird

As described in the comment in the abrt report I already had done that - and abrt further faked that.

> Then run thunderbird inside the gdb debugger. Please do the following:

Sorry, as described in comment 3 it started working again after a reboot and I can't provide the requested information. But again: AFAIK that is exactly what abrt did.


I no longer (or currently don't) have a problem, but with two independent reports it seems like there really is a real issue which either occurs randomly or just is hard to reproduce. IMHO the issue should remain open for some time and we should see if other duplicates reports are seen.
Comment 7 Bug Zapper 2010-11-03 15:05:53 EDT
This message is a reminder that Fedora 12 is nearing its end of life.
Approximately 30 (thirty) days from now Fedora will stop maintaining
and issuing updates for Fedora 12.  It is Fedora's policy to close all
bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained.  At that time
this bug will be closed as WONTFIX if it remains open with a Fedora 
'version' of '12'.

Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you
plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version' 
to a later Fedora version prior to Fedora 12's end of life.

Bug Reporter: Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that 
we may not be able to fix it before Fedora 12 is end of life.  If you 
would still like to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it 
against a later version of Fedora please change the 'version' of this 
bug to the applicable version.  If you are unable to change the version, 
please add a comment here and someone will do it for you.

Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's 
lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events.  Often a 
more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes 
bugs or makes them obsolete.

The process we are following is described here: 
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping
Comment 8 Bug Zapper 2010-12-03 12:01:29 EST
Fedora 12 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2010-12-02. Fedora 12 is 
no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further 
security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug.

If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of 
Fedora please feel free to reopen this bug against that version.

Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed.

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.