Version-Release number of selected component: libreoffice-core-3.5.7.2-2.fc17 Additional info: libreport version: 2.0.14 abrt_version: 2.0.13 backtrace_rating: 4 cmdline: /usr/lib/libreoffice/program/soffice.bin --splash-pipe=6 crash_function: osl_mapFile kernel: 3.6.1-1.fc17.i686 truncated backtrace: :Thread no. 1 (10 frames) : #0 osl_mapFile at /usr/src/debug/libreoffice-3.5.7.2/sal/osl/unx/file.cxx:1160 : #1 initialize at /usr/src/debug/libreoffice-3.5.7.2/store/source/lockbyte.cxx:501 : #2 store::FileLockBytes_createInstance at /usr/src/debug/libreoffice-3.5.7.2/store/source/lockbyte.cxx:916 : #3 store_openFile at /usr/src/debug/libreoffice-3.5.7.2/store/source/store.cxx:164 : #4 create at /usr/src/debug/libreoffice-3.5.7.2/solver/unxlngi6.pro/inc/store/store.hxx:447 : #5 ORegistry::initRegistry at /usr/src/debug/libreoffice-3.5.7.2/registry/source/regimpl.cxx:491 : #6 openRegistry at /usr/src/debug/libreoffice-3.5.7.2/registry/source/registry.cxx:173 : #7 open at /usr/src/debug/libreoffice-3.5.7.2/solver/unxlngi6.pro/inc/registry/registry.hxx:1219 : #8 (anonymous namespace)::SimpleRegistry::openRdb at /usr/src/debug/libreoffice-3.5.7.2/stoc/source/simpleregistry/simpleregistry.cxx:1152 : #9 (anonymous namespace)::SimpleRegistry::open at /usr/src/debug/libreoffice-3.5.7.2/stoc/source/simpleregistry/simpleregistry.cxx:1206
Created attachment 631147 [details] File: core_backtrace
Created attachment 631148 [details] File: environ
Created attachment 631149 [details] File: backtrace
Created attachment 631150 [details] File: limits
Created attachment 631151 [details] File: cgroup
Created attachment 631152 [details] File: maps
Created attachment 631153 [details] File: dso_list
Created attachment 631154 [details] File: var_log_messages
Created attachment 631155 [details] File: open_fds
In what circumstances did this happen? Did you start libreoffice while an update was in progress or something like that?
(In reply to comment #10) > In what circumstances did this happen? Did you start libreoffice while an > update was in progress or something like that? Yes, looks like either that or low main memory/swap space like in comment 3 to bug 804429.
caolanm->sbergman: Doesn't look like its really a fixable scenario, right ?
(In reply to comment #12) > caolanm->sbergman: Doesn't look like its really a fixable scenario, right ? Not unless the reporter comes up with a reproducible scenario. So closing for now; feel free to reopen if there is further information.