Bug 911797 - eog 'Aborted' when viewing large png
Summary: eog 'Aborted' when viewing large png
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE of bug 912030
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: eog
Version: 18
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Kalev Lember
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2013-02-16 01:34 UTC by Matt Hirsch
Modified: 2013-02-17 14:30 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

Fixed In Version:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2013-02-17 14:29:36 UTC
Type: Bug
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)
A large image file that caused the described problem (28.02 KB, image/png)
2013-02-16 01:34 UTC, Matt Hirsch
no flags Details

Description Matt Hirsch 2013-02-16 01:34:46 UTC
Created attachment 698051 [details]
A large image file that caused the described problem

Description of problem: If I open a large png image using eog, eog will often close with the message: 

eog: cairo-mempool.c:160: get_buddy: Assertion `offset + (1 << bits) <= pool->num_blocks' failed.
Aborted

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
eog-3.6.2-1.fc18.x86_64

How reproducible:
Sometimes this happens immediately, sometimes after moving the mouse over the eog window, sometimes after zooming in on the image, but usually within a few seconds of interaction with the window. Then it will not happen again for some time. I can't always reproduce the bug. I haven't been able to reproduce it while running under gdb.

Steps to Reproduce:
1. run: eog big.png
2. If the 'Aborted' message is not received right away, interact with the window, such as zooming, scrolling, or re-sizing.
  
Actual results:

Eog closes with the above 'Aborted' message.

Expected results:

Normal viewing of the window

Additional info:

I also get this message on closing eog. I'm not sure if its related.

(eog:6354): EOG-CRITICAL **: eog_list_store_length: assertion `EOG_IS_LIST_STORE (store)' failed

Comment 1 Kalev Lember 2013-02-17 14:29:36 UTC
Thanks for the bug report. I'll mark it as a duplicate with another bug that has a better backtrace. In any case it seems to be a cairo regression; can you re-test it again with cairo-1.12.14-1.fc18 please?

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 912030 ***


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