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 105578 - gnome-panel (process 2980)
gnome-panel (process 2980)
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 94422
Product: gnome-panel
Classification: Other
Component: clock
unspecified
Other other
: Normal normal
: ---
Assigned To: Panel Maintainers
Panel Maintainers
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2003-02-08 13:05 UTC by imravic
Modified: 2004-12-22 21:47 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---



Description imravic 2003-02-08 13:03:11 UTC
Package: gnome-panel
Severity: normal
Version: 2.0.6
Synopsis: gnome-panel (process 2980)
Bugzilla-Product: gnome-panel
Bugzilla-Component: clock applet
BugBuddy-GnomeVersion: 2.0 (2.0.3)

Description: "gnome-panel" (process 2980) has chrashed...
Description of Problem:


Steps to reproduce the problem:
1. Connect (Internet)
2. Add new button ("modem lights...?", or something)
3. Right click on it

Actual Results: Not a pretty thing, but I don't care... :-)


Expected Results: I don't know. Maybe to see some modem lights... :-)))


How often does this happen? 1-st time. (This is my 3-rd day on Linux.) 


Additional Information: No big deal I hope!




Debugging Information:

Backtrace was generated from '/usr/bin/gnome-panel'

(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...[New
Thread 8192 (LWP 2980)]

0x420ae169 in wait4 () from /lib/i686/libc.so.6

Thread 1 (Thread 8192 (LWP 2980))

  • #0 wait4
    from /lib/i686/libc.so.6
  • #1 __DTOR_END__
    from /lib/i686/libc.so.6
  • #2 waitpid
    from /lib/i686/libpthread.so.0
  • #3 libgnomeui_module_info_get
    from /usr/lib/libgnomeui-2.so.0
  • #4 __pthread_sighandler
    from /lib/i686/libpthread.so.0
  • #5 <signal handler called>
  • #6 g_type_check_instance_is_a
    from /usr/lib/libgobject-2.0.so.0
  • #7 gdk_x11_drawable_get_xid
    from /usr/lib/libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0
  • #8 send_xembed_message
    from /usr/lib/libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0
  • #9 toplevel_focus_in_handler
    from /usr/lib/libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0
  • #10 _gtk_marshal_BOOLEAN__BOXED
    from /usr/lib/libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0
  • #11 g_closure_invoke
    from /usr/lib/libgobject-2.0.so.0
  • #12 signal_emit_unlocked_R
    from /usr/lib/libgobject-2.0.so.0
  • #13 g_signal_emit_valist
    from /usr/lib/libgobject-2.0.so.0
  • #14 gtk_signal_emit
    from /usr/lib/libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0
  • #15 gtk_widget_event_internal
    from /usr/lib/libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0
  • #16 gtk_main_do_event
    from /usr/lib/libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0
  • #17 gdk_event_dispatch
    from /usr/lib/libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0
  • #18 g_main_dispatch
    from /usr/lib/libglib-2.0.so.0
  • #19 g_main_context_dispatch
    from /usr/lib/libglib-2.0.so.0
  • #20 g_main_context_iterate
    from /usr/lib/libglib-2.0.so.0
  • #21 g_main_loop_run
    from /usr/lib/libglib-2.0.so.0
  • #22 gtk_main
    from /usr/lib/libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0
  • #23 main
  • #24 __libc_start_main
    from /lib/i686/libc.so.6
  • #0 wait4
    from /lib/i686/libc.so.6




------- Bug moved to this database by unknown@bugzilla.gnome.org 2003-02-08 08:03 -------

The original reporter (imravic@inet.hr) of this bug does not have an account here.
Reassigning to the exporter, unknown@bugzilla.gnome.org.
Reassigning to the default owner of the component, gnome-panel-maint@bugzilla.gnome.org.

Comment 1 Elijah Newren 2003-02-08 16:06:59 UTC
Thanks for the bug report.  You needn't worry about the crashes.  You
can safely continuing to do other things and when you log back in
everything should be set up correctly.  It just means that the
gnome-panel temporarily failed.  Logging back in restarts it as if
nothing had ever happened.  From what I have been able to determine,
this crash only happens around 5% of the time you try to modify the
XEMBED-based system tray.  I always got it a little while after
playing with the RedHat Network icon.

We would definitely like to fix this bug, however.  This problem seems
to have been reported before, but it is somewhat difficult to track
down.  You may be able to help.  Can you see if you can get this crash
again repeatably?  If so, can you tell us the exact steps you take to
get the crash?  Also, if you would really like to help track this
down, it may be helpful to read bug 94422 where I (and some others)
described the work done to try to get this crash.  See if you can get
it the same way, and also let us know if you got the crash by doing
something different.

I'm going to mark this as a duplicate of 94422, but add myself to the
cc list so that if any extra information is added, I'll know about it.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 94422 ***