Bug 119370 – Nautilus crashed in 'realize' at nautilus-icon-container.c:3016

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 119370 - Nautilus crashed in 'realize' at nautilus-icon-container.c:3016


Summary:	Nautilus crashed in 'realize' at nautilus-icon-container.c:3016


Status:	RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 122141

Product:	nautilus
Classification:	Core
Component:	general
Version:	2.4.x
Hardware:	Other other

Importance:	High critical
Target Milestone:	---
Assigned To:	Nautilus Maintainers
QA Contact:	Nautilus Maintainers

URL:
Whiteboard:

Duplicates:	122131 122825 123181 127048 127069 131683 (view as bug list)
Depends on:
Blocks:

Reported:	2003-08-07 20:46 UTC by Dennis Cranston
Modified:	2004-12-22 21:47 UTC

See Also:
GNOME target:	---
GNOME version:	---

Description Dennis Cranston 2003-08-07 20:47:10 UTC

Distribution: Red Hat Linux release 9 (Shrike)
Package: nautilus
Severity: critical
Version: GNOME2.3.6 2.3.x
Gnome-Distributor: GNOME.Org
Synopsis: Nautilus crashed.
Bugzilla-Product: nautilus
Bugzilla-Component: general
Bugzilla-Version: 2.3.x
BugBuddy-GnomeVersion: 2.0 (2.3.3.1)
Description:
Description of the crash:
It crashed while I was downloading an rpm.  (I don't know if that really
has any relation to the problem.)

Steps to reproduce the crash:
1. N/A

Expected Results:
Nautilus should never crash.

How often does this happen?
N/A

Additional Information:



Debugging Information:

Backtrace was generated from '/gnome/head/INSTALL/bin/nautilus'

[New Thread 1088306400 (LWP 21131)]
[New Thread 1094237488 (LWP 21147)]
[New Thread 1093971248 (LWP 21146)]
[New Thread 1092975920 (LWP 21142)]
[New Thread 1092709680 (LWP 21141)]
[New Thread 1092443440 (LWP 21140)]
[New Thread 1092177200 (LWP 21139)]
0xffffe002 in ?? ()

+ Trace 39443

Thread 1 (Thread 1088306400 (LWP 21131))

#0 ??
#1 libgnomeui_segv_handle
at gnome-ui-init.c line 738
#2 <signal handler called>
#3 g_logv
#4 g_log
#5 realize
at nautilus-icon-container.c line 2949
#6 g_cclosure_marshal_VOID__VOID
at gmarshal.c line 77
#7 g_type_class_meta_marshal
at gclosure.c line 514
#8 g_closure_invoke
at gclosure.c line 437
#9 signal_emit_unlocked_R
at gsignal.c line 2752
#10 g_signal_emit_valist
at gsignal.c line 2554
#11 g_signal_emit
at gsignal.c line 2612
#12 gtk_widget_realize
at gtkwidget.c line 2018
#13 eel_canvas_item_realize
at eel-canvas.c line 354
#14 eel_canvas_item_realize
at eel-canvas.c line 351
#15 eel_canvas_item_show
at eel-canvas.c line 777
#16 finish_adding_icon
at nautilus-icon-container.c line 4768
#17 finish_adding_new_icons
at nautilus-icon-container.c line 4794
#18 redo_layout_internal
at nautilus-icon-container.c line 1566
#19 redo_layout_callback
at nautilus-icon-container.c line 1592
#20 g_idle_dispatch
at gmain.c line 3242
#21 g_main_dispatch
at gmain.c line 1721
#22 g_main_context_dispatch
at gmain.c line 2269
#23 g_main_context_iterate
at gmain.c line 2350
#24 g_main_loop_run
at gmain.c line 2570
#25 gtk_main
at gtkmain.c line 1093
#26 main
at nautilus-main.c line 280
#27 __libc_start_main
from /lib/tls/libc.so.6
#0 ??





------- Bug moved to this database by unknown@bugzilla.gnome.org 2003-08-07 16:47 -------

Reassigning to the default owner of the component, nautilus-maint@bugzilla.gnome.org.

Comment 1 Vincent Untz 2003-09-02 21:43:05 UTC

Just saw this bug. I'm using Nautilus 2.3.9 (compiled with Garnome
0.26.1). I didn't do anything special: I clicked on the Evolution
launcher from the panel and I got this stack trace.

Backtrace was generated from '/usr/local/garnome/bin/nautilus'

[New Thread 16384 (LWP 19675)]
[New Thread 32769 (LWP 19713)]
[New Thread 16386 (LWP 19714)]
[New Thread 32771 (LWP 19715)]
[New Thread 49156 (LWP 19716)]
[New Thread 65541 (LWP 19717)]
0x40c7db89 in wait4 () from /lib/libc.so.6

+ Trace 39926

Thread 6 (Thread 65541 (LWP 19717))

#0 sigsuspend
from /lib/libc.so.6
#1 __pthread_wait_for_restart_signal
from /lib/libpthread.so.0
#2 pthread_cond_wait
from /lib/libpthread.so.0
#3 gnome_vfs_thread_pool_wait_for_work
at gnome-vfs-thread-pool.c line 163
#4 thread_entry
at gnome-vfs-thread-pool.c line 177
#5 g_thread_create_proxy
at gthread.c line 551
#6 pthread_start_thread
from /lib/libpthread.so.0

Thread 5 (Thread 49156 (LWP 19716))

#0 sigsuspend
from /lib/libc.so.6
#1 __pthread_wait_for_restart_signal
from /lib/libpthread.so.0
#2 pthread_cond_wait
from /lib/libpthread.so.0
#3 gnome_vfs_thread_pool_wait_for_work
at gnome-vfs-thread-pool.c line 163
#4 thread_entry
at gnome-vfs-thread-pool.c line 177
#5 g_thread_create_proxy
at gthread.c line 551
#6 pthread_start_thread
from /lib/libpthread.so.0

Thread 4 (Thread 32771 (LWP 19715))

#0 sigsuspend
from /lib/libc.so.6
#1 __pthread_wait_for_restart_signal
from /lib/libpthread.so.0
#2 pthread_cond_wait
from /lib/libpthread.so.0
#3 gnome_vfs_thread_pool_wait_for_work
at gnome-vfs-thread-pool.c line 163
#4 thread_entry
at gnome-vfs-thread-pool.c line 177
#5 g_thread_create_proxy
at gthread.c line 551
#6 pthread_start_thread
from /lib/libpthread.so.0

Thread 3 (Thread 16386 (LWP 19714))

#0 sigsuspend
from /lib/libc.so.6
#1 __pthread_wait_for_restart_signal
from /lib/libpthread.so.0
#2 pthread_cond_wait
from /lib/libpthread.so.0
#3 gnome_vfs_thread_pool_wait_for_work
at gnome-vfs-thread-pool.c line 163
#4 thread_entry
at gnome-vfs-thread-pool.c line 177
#5 g_thread_create_proxy
at gthread.c line 551
#6 pthread_start_thread
from /lib/libpthread.so.0

Thread 1 (Thread 16384 (LWP 19675))

#0 wait4
from /lib/libc.so.6
#1 sys_sigabbrev
from /lib/libc.so.6
#2 waitpid
from /lib/libpthread.so.0
#3 libgnomeui_segv_handle
at gnome-ui-init.c line 738
#4 __pthread_sighandler
from /lib/libpthread.so.0
#5 sigaction
from /lib/libc.so.6
#6 g_log
#7 realize
at nautilus-icon-container.c line 3016
#8 g_cclosure_marshal_VOID__VOID
at gmarshal.c line 77
#9 g_type_class_meta_marshal
at gclosure.c line 514
#10 g_closure_invoke
at gclosure.c line 437
#11 signal_emit_unlocked_R
at gsignal.c line 2752
#12 g_signal_emit_valist
at gsignal.c line 2554
#13 g_signal_emit
at gsignal.c line 2612
#14 gtk_widget_realize
at gtkwidget.c line 2018
#15 eel_canvas_item_realize
at eel-canvas.c line 354
#16 eel_canvas_item_realize
at eel-canvas.c line 351
#17 eel_canvas_item_show
at eel-canvas.c line 777
#18 finish_adding_icon
at nautilus-icon-container.c line 4875
#19 finish_adding_new_icons
at nautilus-icon-container.c line 4901
#20 redo_layout_internal
at nautilus-icon-container.c line 1579
#21 redo_layout_callback
at nautilus-icon-container.c line 1605
#22 g_idle_dispatch
at gmain.c line 3272
#23 g_main_dispatch
at gmain.c line 1751
#24 g_main_context_dispatch
at gmain.c line 2299
#25 g_main_context_iterate
at gmain.c line 2380
#26 g_main_loop_run
at gmain.c line 2600
#27 gtk_main
at gtkmain.c line 1093
#28 main
at nautilus-main.c line 280
#0 wait4
from /lib/libc.so.6

Comment 2 Vincent Untz 2003-09-02 21:43:38 UTC

Sorry for the spam : I forgot to CC myself.

Comment 3 Alexander Larsson 2003-09-18 13:16:11 UTC

Hmm, this looks related to bug 117931. Here the assertion failing is:
 g_assert (GTK_IS_WINDOW (gtk_widget_get_toplevel (widget)));
where widget it the iconcontainer.
In bug 117931 the assertion failing is:
 window = gtk_widget_get_ancestor (GTK_WIDGET (view),BONOBO_TYPE_WINDOW);
 g_assert (window != NULL);

These look quite similar. I don't understand why it can fail though?
Is the widget somehow unparented?

Comment 4 mwehner 2003-09-25 15:42:10 UTC

*** Bug 122131 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 5 mwehner 2003-09-25 15:47:23 UTC

*** Bug 123181 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 6 mwehner 2003-10-12 13:04:09 UTC

Setting version->2.4.x, adding GNOMEVER2.4, STACKTRACE keywords.

Comment 7 Martin Wehner 2003-11-27 15:05:28 UTC

*** Bug 127048 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 8 Martin Wehner 2003-11-27 15:05:51 UTC

*** Bug 127069 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 9 Martin Wehner 2004-01-23 02:17:26 UTC

*** Bug 131683 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 10 Matthew Gatto 2004-01-28 01:38:06 UTC

*** Bug 122825 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 11 Alexander Larsson 2004-03-03 14:06:57 UTC


*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 122141 ***