Bug 364106 – crash in System Log: string_get_date_string() at logrtns.c:136

After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.

Bug 364106 - crash in System Log: string_get_date_string() at logrtns.c:136


Summary:	crash in System Log: string_get_date_string() at logrtns.c:136


Status:	RESOLVED FIXED

Product:	gnome-utils
Classification:	Deprecated
Component:	logview
Version:	2.18.x
Hardware:	Other All

Importance:	Immediate blocker
Target Milestone:	---
Assigned To:	gnome-utils Maintainers
QA Contact:	gnome-utils Maintainers

URL:
Whiteboard:

Duplicates:	355557 362606 364202 364869 365444 366458 367182 368351 370382 374663 377038 378909 379636 380139 381258 382448 383223 383231 383990 387957 388651 389598 389696 390130 390519 390704 391766 394478 396676 398976 399585 400083 403361 403675 406676 406883 408738 409797 412747 413747 414671 415204 417454 417544 417721 418831 419852 420093 420838 421163 421254 422365 422686 422688 422690 422710 422773 422786 422792 422900 423359 424282 424968 425696 426261 427129 427442 428441 428667 428738 428741 429145 429531 429633 432794 432944 439752 441392 442520 446846 446860 446867 447874 448445 448446 452610 457261 461967 463026 463211 463872 464232 468615 468783 470079 473478 474293 483079 483616 490808 492710 499684 520027 (view as bug list)
Depends on:
Blocks:

Reported:	2006-10-22 08:16 UTC by konzentrat
Modified:	2008-08-25 10:51 UTC

See Also:
GNOME target:	2.18.x
GNOME version:	2.17/2.18

Attachments
Add check for i < n-1 if no date string is found. Proposed Fix. (983 bytes, patch) 2007-04-14 09:24 UTC, Jan Arne Petersen	committed	Details \| Review

Description konzentrat 2006-10-22 08:16:25 UTC

Version: 2.16.1

What were you doing when the application crashed?
start this application		


Distribution: Ubuntu 6.10 (edgy)
Gnome Release: 2.16.1 2006-10-02 (Ubuntu)
BugBuddy Version: 2.16.0

Memory status: size: 29827072 vsize: 0 resident: 29827072 share: 0 rss: 11333632 rss_rlim: 0
CPU usage: start_time: 1161504942 rtime: 0 utime: 25 stime: 0 cutime:24 cstime: 0 timeout: 1 it_real_value: 0 frequency: 0

Backtrace was generated from '/usr/bin/gnome-system-log'

(no debugging symbols found)
Using host libthread_db library "/lib/tls/i686/cmov/libthread_db.so.1".
(no debugging symbols found)
[Thread debugging using libthread_db enabled]
[New Thread -1224951616 (LWP 5607)]
(no debugging symbols found)
0xffffe410 in __kernel_vsyscall ()

+ Trace 77627

Thread 1 (Thread -1224951616 (LWP 5607))

#0 __kernel_vsyscall
#1 __waitpid_nocancel
from /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libpthread.so.0
#2 gnome_gtk_module_info_get
from /usr/lib/libgnomeui-2.so.0
#3 <signal handler called>
#4 ??
#5 ??
#6 ??
#7 ??
#8 g_free
from /usr/lib/libglib-2.0.so.0
#9 ??
#10 ??
#11 ??
#12 ??
#13 ??
#14 ??
#0 __kernel_vsyscall

Comment 1 André Klapper 2006-10-22 11:08:46 UTC

Thanks for taking the time to report this bug.
Unfortunately, that stack trace is missing some elements that will help a lot to solve the problem, so it will be hard for the developers to fix that crash. Can you get us a stack trace with debugging symbols? Please see http://live.gnome.org/GettingTraces for more information on how to do so. Thanks in advance!

Comment 2 konzentrat 2006-10-22 11:33:39 UTC

Hopefully that is what you need. Greetings.


Backtrace was generated from '/usr/bin/gnome-system-log'

Using host libthread_db library "/lib/tls/i686/cmov/libthread_db.so.1".
[Thread debugging using libthread_db enabled]
[New Thread -1225189184 (LWP 6910)]
0xffffe410 in __kernel_vsyscall ()

+ Trace 77660

Thread 1 (Thread -1225189184 (LWP 6910))

#0 __kernel_vsyscall
#1 __waitpid_nocancel
from /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libpthread.so.0
#2 gnome_gtk_module_info_get
from /usr/lib/libgnomeui-2.so.0
#3 <signal handler called>
#4 string_get_date_string
at logrtns.c line 136
#5 log_read_dates
at logrtns.c line 253
#6 log_open
at logrtns.c line 422
#7 logview_add_logs_from_names
at logview.c line 251
#8 main
at main.c line 179
#9 __libc_start_main
from /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libc.so.6
#10 _start
#0 __kernel_vsyscall

Comment 3 André Klapper 2006-10-24 23:01:48 UTC

hi konzentrat, the stacktrace looks good, thanks! :-)
confirming the bug.

Comment 4 André Klapper 2006-10-25 02:32:09 UTC

*** Bug 364202 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 5 André Klapper 2006-10-25 02:32:24 UTC

*** Bug 364869 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 6 André Klapper 2006-10-25 02:32:38 UTC

*** Bug 362606 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 7 André Klapper 2006-10-25 02:33:27 UTC

*** Bug 355557 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 8 André Klapper 2006-10-30 00:05:48 UTC

*** Bug 367182 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 9 André Klapper 2006-10-31 16:38:59 UTC

*** Bug 365444 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 10 André Klapper 2006-10-31 16:39:08 UTC

*** Bug 368351 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 11 André Klapper 2006-11-04 11:58:09 UTC

*** Bug 370382 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 12 Susana 2006-11-20 01:00:57 UTC

*** Bug 377038 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 13 Sebastien Bacher 2006-11-23 10:33:38 UTC

Ubuntu bug about that: https://launchpad.net/distros/ubuntu/+source/gnome-utils/+bug/69622

Comment 14 Susana 2006-11-24 20:43:02 UTC

*** Bug 378909 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 15 Susana 2006-11-27 19:07:13 UTC

*** Bug 379636 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 16 Susana 2006-11-28 20:18:54 UTC

*** Bug 380139 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 17 Susana 2006-12-01 21:29:04 UTC

*** Bug 381258 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 18 Susana 2006-12-05 13:31:14 UTC

*** Bug 382448 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 19 Bruno Boaventura 2006-12-07 04:23:33 UTC

*** Bug 383231 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 20 Bruno Boaventura 2006-12-07 04:25:33 UTC

*** Bug 383223 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 21 Susana 2006-12-09 13:50:35 UTC

*** Bug 383990 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 22 Susana 2006-12-20 19:12:39 UTC

*** Bug 387957 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 23 Susana 2006-12-22 19:59:58 UTC

*** Bug 388651 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 24 Susana 2006-12-26 02:05:27 UTC

*** Bug 389598 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 25 Susana 2006-12-26 13:40:06 UTC

*** Bug 389696 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 26 Susana 2006-12-28 12:04:09 UTC

*** Bug 390130 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 27 Susana 2006-12-29 13:39:20 UTC

*** Bug 390519 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 28 palfrey 2006-12-29 19:24:37 UTC

*** Bug 390704 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 29 Susana 2007-01-02 13:11:19 UTC

*** Bug 391766 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 30 Susana 2007-01-15 23:50:43 UTC

*** Bug 396676 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 31 Bruno Boaventura 2007-01-21 11:03:59 UTC

*** Bug 398976 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 32 Mariano Suárez-Alvarez 2007-01-23 09:14:32 UTC

*** Bug 399585 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 33 Susana 2007-01-24 12:48:24 UTC

*** Bug 400083 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 34 Bruno Boaventura 2007-02-02 20:21:18 UTC

*** Bug 403675 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 35 André Klapper 2007-02-08 01:17:14 UTC

*** Bug 394478 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 36 André Klapper 2007-02-08 01:17:20 UTC

*** Bug 403361 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 37 Susana 2007-02-11 18:28:24 UTC

*** Bug 406676 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 38 Susana 2007-02-12 19:35:05 UTC

*** Bug 406883 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 39 André Klapper 2007-02-18 13:35:54 UTC

*** Bug 408738 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 40 André Klapper 2007-02-18 13:39:02 UTC

bug 364106, bug 374663, bug 366458 seem to share the same traces

Comment 41 Susana 2007-02-19 23:58:45 UTC

*** Bug 409797 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 42 Pedro Villavicencio 2007-02-27 19:51:59 UTC

*** Bug 412747 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 43 Susana 2007-03-02 15:02:05 UTC

*** Bug 413747 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 44 Susana 2007-03-05 14:11:36 UTC

*** Bug 414671 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 45 Susana 2007-03-06 18:08:05 UTC

*** Bug 415204 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 46 Susana 2007-03-13 00:53:00 UTC

*** Bug 417454 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 47 Susana 2007-03-13 00:54:48 UTC

*** Bug 417544 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 48 Susana 2007-03-15 13:25:02 UTC

*** Bug 417721 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 49 Susana 2007-03-17 20:54:56 UTC

*** Bug 418831 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 50 Sebastien Bacher 2007-03-22 10:27:04 UTC

*** Bug 420093 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 51 Sebastien Bacher 2007-03-22 10:27:12 UTC

*** Bug 420838 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 52 Sebastien Bacher 2007-03-22 10:28:44 UTC

launchad has a GNOME 2.18.0 duplicate

Comment 53 Susana 2007-03-22 16:56:46 UTC

*** Bug 421163 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 54 Susana 2007-03-22 16:57:30 UTC

*** Bug 421254 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 55 Susana 2007-03-22 22:43:02 UTC

*** Bug 419852 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 56 Susana 2007-03-27 20:29:05 UTC

*** Bug 422365 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 57 Susana 2007-03-27 20:30:33 UTC

*** Bug 422686 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 58 Susana 2007-03-27 20:30:48 UTC

*** Bug 422688 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 59 Susana 2007-03-27 20:31:00 UTC

*** Bug 422690 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 60 Susana 2007-03-27 20:31:16 UTC

*** Bug 422710 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 61 Susana 2007-03-27 20:32:57 UTC

*** Bug 422786 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 62 Susana 2007-03-27 20:33:38 UTC

*** Bug 422792 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 63 Susana 2007-03-27 20:55:26 UTC

*** Bug 422900 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 64 Susana 2007-03-27 20:55:52 UTC

*** Bug 423359 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 65 Susana 2007-03-30 14:51:35 UTC

*** Bug 424282 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 66 Pedro Villavicencio 2007-03-31 22:36:14 UTC

*** Bug 424968 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 67 Susana 2007-04-04 20:35:48 UTC

*** Bug 425696 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 68 Susana 2007-04-04 20:41:34 UTC

*** Bug 426261 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 69 palfrey 2007-04-07 14:05:46 UTC

*** Bug 366458 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 70 palfrey 2007-04-07 14:05:52 UTC

*** Bug 374663 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 71 palfrey 2007-04-07 14:06:05 UTC

*** Bug 422773 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 72 palfrey 2007-04-07 14:06:13 UTC

*** Bug 427129 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 73 Pedro Villavicencio 2007-04-07 23:33:16 UTC

*** Bug 427442 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 74 Bruno Boaventura 2007-04-11 01:11:28 UTC

*** Bug 428441 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 75 André Klapper 2007-04-11 20:56:36 UTC

the useful trace in comment 2 is the same as in https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-utils/+bug/69622 .

169 dups, 107 in the last 30 days. gnome 2.18.x blocker.

Comment 76 Susana 2007-04-12 12:45:05 UTC

*** Bug 428667 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 77 Susana 2007-04-12 12:46:41 UTC

*** Bug 428738 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 78 Susana 2007-04-12 12:47:22 UTC

*** Bug 428741 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 79 Diego Escalante Urrelo (not reading bugmail) 2007-04-12 17:42:37 UTC

in gnome-utils/logview/logrtns.c:252

         while (newdate == NULL && !done) {
           i++;
           date_string = string_get_date_string (buffer_lines[i]);

Isn't that i++ wrong? I don't quite get the code of the file but I guess that if you always add 1 to 'i' under some circumstance you'll get an out of range error.

Just a guess, I'm no hardcore hacker.

Comment 80 Jan Arne Petersen 2007-04-14 09:24:05 UTC

Created attachment 86331 [details] [review]
Add check for i < n-1 if no date string is found. Proposed Fix.

Comment 81 Emmanuele Bassi (:ebassi) 2007-04-14 09:51:36 UTC

thanks jan; the patch looks fine.

someone experiencing this bug can try with jan's patch and see if it fixes the issue? if I get some feedback I'll apply it to the stable branch and release a 2.18.1 version of gnome-utils.

Comment 82 Jan Arne Petersen 2007-04-14 11:05:29 UTC

I used the attached log file at bug 374663 as test case.

Comment 83 Emmanuele Bassi (:ebassi) 2007-04-14 11:37:38 UTC

(In reply to comment #82)
> I used the attached log file at bug 374663 as test case.

okay then. :-)

patch applied to trunk and gnome-2-18 branches, will release ASAP. again, thanks for your patch!

Comment 84 Benoît Dejean 2007-04-14 19:37:35 UTC

Who has reviewed this patch ?
AFAICS, it just breaks the loop. All the ways, the code below that check is never run.

Comment 85 Emmanuele Bassi (:ebassi) 2007-04-14 19:43:54 UTC

(In reply to comment #84)
> Who has reviewed this patch ?
> AFAICS, it just breaks the loop. All the ways, the code below that check is
> never run.

I reviewed the patch and tested it, and it showed no regressions.

if the counter reaches the sentinel, then there's no point in looking any further, which is correct. the whole code in that section needs refactoring, but that is a task for the unstable branch.

Comment 86 Benoît Dejean 2007-04-14 20:00:15 UTC

0k thanks

Comment 87 Jan Arne Petersen 2007-04-14 20:02:19 UTC

Reply to comment #84:

The code below that check is run if date_string != NULL.

Comment 88 Benoît Dejean 2007-04-14 20:14:12 UTC

Oh right, nice obfuscation :)

Comment 89 Susana 2007-04-19 15:05:17 UTC

*** Bug 429145 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 90 Susana 2007-04-19 15:08:55 UTC

*** Bug 429531 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 91 Susana 2007-04-19 15:13:07 UTC

*** Bug 429633 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 92 Bruno Boaventura 2007-04-24 00:22:22 UTC

*** Bug 432794 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 93 Pedro Villavicencio 2007-05-10 01:22:54 UTC

*** Bug 432944 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 94 Pedro Villavicencio 2007-05-19 20:50:26 UTC

*** Bug 439752 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 95 Pedro Villavicencio 2007-05-26 13:20:07 UTC

*** Bug 441392 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 96 palfrey 2007-05-31 15:42:01 UTC

*** Bug 442520 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 97 Pedro Villavicencio 2007-06-13 01:27:28 UTC

*** Bug 446867 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 98 Pedro Villavicencio 2007-06-13 01:31:23 UTC

*** Bug 446860 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 99 Susana 2007-06-13 16:39:41 UTC

*** Bug 446846 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 100 Pedro Villavicencio 2007-06-17 23:02:35 UTC

*** Bug 448446 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 101 Pedro Villavicencio 2007-06-17 23:03:47 UTC

*** Bug 448445 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 102 Pedro Villavicencio 2007-06-17 23:05:23 UTC

*** Bug 447874 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 103 Christian Kirbach 2007-07-01 10:27:46 UTC

*** Bug 452610 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 104 Pedro Villavicencio 2007-07-27 00:24:15 UTC

*** Bug 457261 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 105 Iestyn Pryce 2007-08-03 21:40:20 UTC

*** Bug 463211 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 106 Iestyn Pryce 2007-08-03 21:43:54 UTC

*** Bug 463026 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 107 Iestyn Pryce 2007-08-06 19:55:59 UTC

*** Bug 463872 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 108 Susana 2007-09-15 11:37:39 UTC

*** Bug 468615 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 109 Susana 2007-09-15 11:41:40 UTC

*** Bug 461967 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 110 Susana 2007-09-15 11:41:51 UTC

*** Bug 464232 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 111 Susana 2007-09-15 11:41:56 UTC

*** Bug 468783 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 112 Susana 2007-09-15 11:42:00 UTC

*** Bug 470079 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 113 Susana 2007-09-15 11:42:04 UTC

*** Bug 473478 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 114 Susana 2007-09-15 11:42:08 UTC

*** Bug 474293 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 115 info 2007-09-15 15:08:06 UTC

(In reply to comment #114)
> *** Bug 474293 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
> 

Alright, Bugzilla for non IT experts. What am I supposed to do with the patch, where, what directory, terminal?? Don't make it so hard for Linux Newbies, please.  Everyone has to start at some point.

Ubuntu bug about that:
https://launchpad.net/distros/ubuntu/+source/gnome-utils/+bug/69622 

Now should I follow the Ubuntu Steps? Or patch my forehead with the attachment at the bottom of this page?????

Thank you,
Thomas

Comment 116 André Klapper 2007-09-15 15:49:16 UTC

Hi Thomas,
*if* you compile from source (read: if you are an IT expert), you can apply the patch. If you are normal user, the easiest way is to update to a recent version that includes this patch, for example GNOME 2.18. GNOME 2.18 is included in Fedora 7.

Comment 117 info 2007-09-15 16:49:31 UTC

the only thing I compiled so far, was Quanta via Fink in Darwin, speaking OSX, actually I was surprised to find it working. I cannot upgrade to Fedora 7, the CD media check gives me an error and lectures me that my CPU doesn't support "slow mode" or long mode, dunno anymo (i386, yep). It's a Pentium III, well Dual, but mmppf. ok, I'll try to shoot that Gnome 2.18 into my system and let y'all know.

Vielen Dank,
Thomas

Comment 118 info 2007-09-15 21:39:31 UTC

Lost again, I visited the Gnome web site, well, there is 2.18 Live CD and other stuff, what am I supposed to do?

Comment 119 André Klapper 2007-09-15 22:08:15 UTC

again: you are running fedora 6 which provides gnome 2.16. the easiest way for you: gnome 2.18 and a fix for this problem here are included in Fedora 7, so upgrade to fedora 7. perhaps some volunteers have also packaged some gnome 2.18 packages for fedora 6, but this is definitely a question for your distribution.
the hard way would be: compile the whole gnome 2.18 stack on your own (i wouldn't recommend that to an average user). if you want to compile GNOME yourself, you can use GARNOME for example.

Comment 120 info 2007-09-16 04:29:53 UTC

well, I understood the thing with Fedora 7. But perhaps I made it not clear enough on my end: I cannot run Fedora 7, and I am talking about the 386 32 bit version. No one out there seems to believe me: I get a media error and it tells me something in my CPU does not support long or slow mode or whatever. BTW, I had no chance to install Ubuntu, Suse 10.2, or Debian. Only Fedora 6 and below works. Now on what: It's a dual server board, 2x Pentium III, 866Mhz, 512MB Ram, no AGP support, hence Graphics via PCI, should be enough, or not? I read the specs for all the other distro, but nope. I guess I simply won't have a system log than, I dunno what to do with it anyway, LOL. I have Fedora 7 on another sytems, same DVD that gives me an error on PC1 worked fine on PC (an HP Pavillion). hmm, is there something in the MB Bios I need to know?!?

Sorry, if this is not the place for it, but I really appreciate your efforts to help me. Garnome, ..., I'll look at it, but well I am sure I don't know enough about all this ...

Comment 121 info 2007-09-16 04:36:01 UTC

Just had a thought, I have an older FC6 installation on a different hard drive. Could I just find the file that's doing 'it' and replace the bugged one? Getting creative here .... but hey, which file is it??

Comment 122 info 2007-09-16 06:37:12 UTC

I found this here, couldn't I take those files from my other FC6 installation and copy them?

http://linux.die.net/man/1/gnome-system-log

Files

/var/log/messages
The system's main logfile.
/etc/syslog.conf
Configuration file for syslogd. See syslog.conf(5) for exact information.

Comment 123 André Klapper 2007-09-16 10:31:34 UTC

no, you can't just replace the file, and i already told you what's possible. if you can't upgrade to a newer version it means that you can't upgrade and won't receive a fix for this issue.

Comment 124 Susana 2007-10-06 11:13:42 UTC

*** Bug 483079 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 125 Susana 2007-10-06 11:14:30 UTC

*** Bug 483616 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 126 Susana 2007-11-02 12:35:50 UTC

*** Bug 490808 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 127 Christoph Wolk 2007-11-03 09:11:04 UTC

*** Bug 492710 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 128 Teppo Turtiainen 2007-12-01 09:02:39 UTC

*** Bug 499684 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 129 Cosimo Cecchi 2008-08-25 10:51:19 UTC

*** Bug 520027 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***