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 544109 - Evolution crashes on renaming Exchange calendar twice
Evolution crashes on renaming Exchange calendar twice
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 337503
Product: Evolution Exchange
Classification: Deprecated
Component: Connector
2.22.x
Other Linux
: Normal critical
: ---
Assigned To: Connector Maintainer
Ximian Connector QA
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2008-07-22 06:14 UTC by Bharath Acharya
Modified: 2008-08-06 08:20 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: 2.23/2.24



Description Bharath Acharya 2008-07-22 06:14:46 UTC
Overview Description: Rename an Exchange Calendar twice and Evo would crash

Steps to Reproduce:
1) Create a new Exchange Calendar
2) Rename it twice

Actual Results:
Evolution crashed

Expected Results:
The Calendar gets renamed

Always reproducible
Comment 1 Bharath Acharya 2008-07-22 06:17:53 UTC

(evolution:4275): evolution-exchange-storage-CRITICAL **: e_folder_get_physical_uri: assertion `E_IS_FOLDER (folder)' failed

Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.

Thread 1 (Thread 0xb6134720 (LWP 4275))

  • #0 strrchr
    from /lib/libc.so.6
  • #1 xfer_folder
    at exchange-hierarchy-webdav.c line 430
  • #2 exchange_hierarchy_xfer_folder
    at exchange-hierarchy.c line 268
  • #3 exchange_account_xfer_folder
    at exchange-account.c line 598
  • #4 e_exchange_calendar_commit
    at exchange-calendar.c line 466
  • #5 epl_invoke
    at e-plugin.c line 1034
  • #6 e_plugin_invoke
    at e-plugin.c line 768
  • #7 ech_commit
    at e-config.c line 1269
  • #8 e_config_commit
    at e-config.c line 1017
  • #9 ec_dialog_response
    at e-config.c line 860
  • #10 g_cclosure_marshal_VOID
    from /usr/lib/libgobject-2.0.so.0
  • #11 g_closure_invoke
    from /usr/lib/libgobject-2.0.so.0
  • #12 ??
    from /usr/lib/libgobject-2.0.so.0
  • #13 g_signal_emit_valist
    from /usr/lib/libgobject-2.0.so.0
  • #14 g_signal_emit
    from /usr/lib/libgobject-2.0.so.0
  • #15 gtk_dialog_response
    from /usr/lib/libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0
  • #16 g_cclosure_marshal_VOID__VOID
    from /usr/lib/libgobject-2.0.so.0
  • #17 g_closure_invoke
    from /usr/lib/libgobject-2.0.so.0
  • #18 ??
    from /usr/lib/libgobject-2.0.so.0
  • #19 g_signal_emit_valist
    from /usr/lib/libgobject-2.0.so.0
  • #20 g_signal_emit
    from /usr/lib/libgobject-2.0.so.0
  • #21 gtk_button_clicked
    from /usr/lib/libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0
  • #22 ??
    from /usr/lib/libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0
  • #23 g_cclosure_marshal_VOID__VOID
    from /usr/lib/libgobject-2.0.so.0
  • #24 ??
    from /usr/lib/libgobject-2.0.so.0
  • #25 g_closure_invoke
    from /usr/lib/libgobject-2.0.so.0
  • #26 ??
    from /usr/lib/libgobject-2.0.so.0
  • #27 g_signal_emit_valist
    from /usr/lib/libgobject-2.0.so.0
  • #28 g_signal_emit
    from /usr/lib/libgobject-2.0.so.0
  • #29 gtk_button_released
    from /usr/lib/libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0
  • #30 ??
    from /usr/lib/libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0
  • #31 ??
    from /usr/lib/libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0
  • #32 ??
    from /usr/lib/libgobject-2.0.so.0
  • #33 g_closure_invoke
    from /usr/lib/libgobject-2.0.so.0
  • #34 ??
    from /usr/lib/libgobject-2.0.so.0
  • #35 g_signal_emit_valist
    from /usr/lib/libgobject-2.0.so.0
  • #36 g_signal_emit
    from /usr/lib/libgobject-2.0.so.0
  • #37 ??
    from /usr/lib/libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0
  • #38 gtk_propagate_event
    from /usr/lib/libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0
  • #39 gtk_main_do_event
    from /usr/lib/libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0
  • #40 ??
    from /usr/lib/libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0
  • #41 g_main_context_dispatch
    from /usr/lib/libglib-2.0.so.0
  • #42 ??
    from /usr/lib/libglib-2.0.so.0
  • #43 g_main_loop_run
    from /usr/lib/libglib-2.0.so.0
  • #44 bonobo_main
    from /usr/lib/libbonobo-2.so.0
  • #45 main
    at main.c line 783

Comment 2 Akhil Laddha 2008-07-23 05:58:31 UTC
crash should be filed as Critical Severity always :)
Comment 3 Bharath Acharya 2008-08-06 08:20:38 UTC

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 337503 ***