Bug 615791 - [abrt] crash in evolution-data-server-2.30.2-2.fc13: __libc_free: Process /usr/libexec/e-addressbook-factory was killed by signal 11 (SIGSEGV)
Summary: [abrt] crash in evolution-data-server-2.30.2-2.fc13: __libc_free: Process /us...
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE of bug 611429
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: evolution-data-server
Version: 13
Hardware: x86_64
OS: Linux
low
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Matthew Barnes
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard: abrt_hash:484eb482df819f4c990fa0f18ab...
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2010-07-18 20:29 UTC by Matthew Saltzman
Modified: 2010-11-08 19:00 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2010-11-08 19:00:22 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:

Attachments (Terms of Use)
File: backtrace (24.78 KB, text/plain)
2010-07-18 20:29 UTC, Matthew Saltzman 		no flags Details
View All

Description Matthew Saltzman 2010-07-18 20:29:01 UTC 
abrt 1.1.1 detected a crash.

architecture: x86_64
Attached file: backtrace
cmdline: /usr/libexec/e-addressbook-factory
comment: Crashed initiating a reply to a message in an Exchange inbox.  This is the first reply I've sent since backing up Evo on another machine and restoring it on this one.  That's the only unusual feature of this event compared to any previous replies I've made.
component: evolution-data-server
crash_function: __libc_free
executable: /usr/libexec/e-addressbook-factory
global_uuid: 484eb482df819f4c990fa0f18ab20bee7a100328
kernel: 2.6.33.6-147.fc13.x86_64
package: evolution-data-server-2.30.2-2.fc13
rating: 4
reason: Process /usr/libexec/e-addressbook-factory was killed by signal 11 (SIGSEGV)
release: Fedora release 13 (Goddard)
Comment 1 Matthew Saltzman 2010-07-18 20:29:06 UTC 
Created attachment 432730 [details]
File: backtrace
Comment 2 Karel Klíč 2010-11-08 19:00:22 UTC 

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 611429 ***
Comment 3 Karel Klíč 2010-11-08 19:00:22 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 #611429.

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