GNOME Bugzilla – Bug 148847
DUP HEAD for crash if gnome-vfs-daemon version != gnome-vfs version
Last modified: 2006-02-16 15:17:05 UTC
Distribution: Debian 3.1 Package: nautilus Severity: normal Version: GNOME2.6.1 2.6.3 Gnome-Distributor: Debian Synopsis: nautilus crash on startup Bugzilla-Product: nautilus Bugzilla-Component: general Bugzilla-Version: 2.6.3 BugBuddy-GnomeVersion: 2.0 (2.6.1.1) Description: Description of the crash: Nautilus crashes when starting GNOME in debian "testing". How often does this happen? Every time. Debugging Information: Backtrace was generated from '/usr/bin/nautilus' (no debugging symbols found)...Using host libthread_db library "/lib/tls/libthread_db.so.1". (no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...[Thread debugging using libthread_db enabled] [New Thread 1089642560 (LWP 6484)] [New Thread 1101622192 (LWP 6485)] [Thread debugging using libthread_db enabled] [New Thread 1089642560 (LWP 6484)] [New Thread 1101622192 (LWP 6485)] [Thread debugging using libthread_db enabled] [New Thread 1089642560 (LWP 6484)] [New Thread 1101622192 (LWP 6485)] (no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...0x40484431 in __waitpid_nocancel () from /lib/tls/libpthread.so.0
+ Trace 48963
------- Bug moved to this database by unknown@bugzilla.gnome.org 2004-07-30 03:47 ------- Unknown version 2.6.3 in product nautilus. Setting version to "1.0.x". Unknown platform unknown. Setting to default platform "Other". Unknown milestone "unknown" in product "nautilus". Setting to default milestone for this product, '---' Setting to default status "UNCONFIRMED". Setting qa contact to the default for this product. This bug either had no qa contact or an invalid one.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 138986 ***
I'm not sure that this is really a duplicate of that, because I am not using an AMD64 platform.
bug 150006 looks similar...
Looks related to bug 148719.
*** Bug 151967 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Dup from 2.7.x -> upgrading version & reassigning to gnome-vfs. I still think this is a dup of bug 148719.
Martin, I had exactly the same thought when I looked at the backtrace... Murray, could you check what version of gnome-vfs-daemon is running if you have several versions of GNOME installed in different prefixes?
Christophe, yes, gnome-vfs from my 2.6 prefix is running. I feel like that shouldn't happen - so maybe this is a gnome-session bug?
*** Bug 158172 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 158848 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Last duplicate appears to be from 2.8.x, so bumping up the version number.
*** Bug 159096 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 159113 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 159199 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 159201 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 159265 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 160167 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 160158 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 160784 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 161220 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 161296 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 161439 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 161452 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 163022 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
161220 and 163022 (and possibly others) were from 2.9.x, so I'm bumping up the version number.
*** Bug 163216 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 163777 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 164140 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
This happens when the running version of gnome-vfs-daemon differs from the libgnomevfs version (and there has been an incompatible change between the two versions, which is uncommon).
So not really a bug, then? Or at least not worth fixing?
It's not about nautilus version != gnome-vfs version, it's about the running gnome-vfs-daemon version (shipped with gnome-vfs) being different of the gnome-vfs version nautilus is linked with
Then fix the subject ;) At any rate, moving off the 2.10 milestone; I'm guessing we can close this WONTFIX, right?
*** Bug 148719 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
It's worth mentioning that bug 148719 itself had about 15 dups inside it, and searching for "_gnome_vfs_drive_from_corba" shows about 49 bugs reported in total. (figures probably not accurate) :-)
This is a WONTFIX after all. I will add some information now so that it's understood why this happens (and why this is a WONTFIX) for easier bug triaging! The main problem is that the gnome-vfs library talks to the gnome-vfs-daemon through IPC (bonobo at the moment). If now the interface changes and so gnome-vfs-daemon and the library are out of sync this might lead to crashes! Checking for updates of the interface and restarting the daemon will crash all the running applications that still use the old interface. Having and old daemon around and starting new applications (which will use the new interface) will lead to crashes again! Since we can't guarantee that the interface won't change in future versions it's possible that crashes like this will happen on such a change. Please use always dup this bug on such crashes! - Thanks
*** Bug 168625 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 168777 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 169687 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 171033 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 300654 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 302029 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 304222 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 307574 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 308819 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Why can't you simply version the name of the daemon and change it when you break the interface? If it's that uncommon to break the interface, it won't be painful to implement, and if it's common to break the interface it will save a lot of crashes.