Bug 351208 – crash in camel_key_table_lookup at camel-partition-table.c:872

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 351208 - crash in camel_key_table_lookup at camel-partition-table.c:872


Summary:	crash in camel_key_table_lookup at camel-partition-table.c:872


Status:	RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 348149

Product:	evolution-data-server
Classification:	Platform
Component:	Mailer
Version:	1.8.x (obsolete)
Hardware:	Other All

Importance:	High critical
Target Milestone:	---
Assigned To:	evolution-mail-maintainers
QA Contact:	Evolution QA team

URL:
Whiteboard:

Duplicates:	371903 384574 451902 498752 (view as bug list)
Depends on:
Blocks:

Reported:	2006-08-13 22:15 UTC by Joanmarie Diggs (IRC: joanie)
Modified:	2008-01-21 16:24 UTC

See Also:
GNOME target:	---
GNOME version:	2.15/2.16

Attachments
A workaround patch (794 bytes, patch) 2007-08-08 10:28 UTC, Lucky Wankhede	rejected	Details \| Review

Description Joanmarie Diggs (IRC: joanie) 2006-08-13 22:15:18 UTC

What were you doing when the application crashed?
Cancelling out of an "error mailbox in use" dialog


Distribution: Ubuntu 6.10 (edgy)
Gnome Release: 2.15.91 2006-08-08 (Ubuntu)
BugBuddy Version: 2.15.90

Memory status: size: 155340800 vsize: 0 resident: 155340800 share: 0 rss: 23584768 rss_rlim: 0
CPU usage: start_time: 1155498202 rtime: 0 utime: 195 stime: 0 cutime:168 cstime: 0 timeout: 27 it_real_value: 0 frequency: 0

Backtrace was generated from '/usr/bin/evolution-2.8'

Using host libthread_db library "/lib/tls/i686/cmov/libthread_db.so.1".
[Thread debugging using libthread_db enabled]
[New Thread -1231649104 (LWP 6557)]
[New Thread -1330668640 (LWP 6591)]
[New Thread -1296745568 (LWP 6583)]
[New Thread -1322009696 (LWP 6574)]
[New Thread -1313616992 (LWP 6573)]
[New Thread -1279960160 (LWP 6567)]
[New Thread -1271567456 (LWP 6566)]
[New Thread -1263174752 (LWP 6565)]
[New Thread -1254782048 (LWP 6564)]
[New Thread -1246389344 (LWP 6563)]
0xffffe410 in __kernel_vsyscall ()

+ Trace 70389

Thread 3 (Thread -1296745568 (LWP 6583))

#0 __kernel_vsyscall
#1 __waitpid_nocancel
from /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libc.so.6
#2 libgnomeui_segv_handle
at gnome-ui-init.c line 867
#3 <signal handler called>
#4 __kernel_vsyscall
#5 *__GI_raise
from /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libc.so.6
#6 *__GI_abort
from /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libc.so.6
#7 IA__g_logv
#8 IA__g_log
#9 IA__g_assert_warning
at gmessages.c line 552
#10 camel_key_table_lookup
at camel-partition-table.c line 872
#11 hash_write_word
at camel-text-index.c line 198
#12 IA__g_hash_table_foreach
at ghash.c line 662
#13 text_index_write_name
at camel-text-index.c line 645
#14 camel_index_write_name
at camel-index.c line 193
#15 camel_folder_summary_info_new_from_parser
at camel-folder-summary.c line 1034
#16 camel_folder_summary_add_from_parser
at camel-folder-summary.c line 931
#17 summary_update
at camel-mbox-summary.c line 485
#18 mbox_summary_check
at camel-mbox-summary.c line 572
#19 camel_local_summary_check
at camel-local-summary.c line 268
#20 mbox_summary_sync
at camel-mbox-summary.c line 847
#21 camel_local_summary_sync
at camel-local-summary.c line 297
#22 local_sync
at camel-local-folder.c line 498
#23 camel_folder_sync
at camel-folder.c line 273
#24 camel_filter_driver_filter_folder
at camel-filter-driver.c line 1299
#25 em_filter_folder_element_filter
at mail-ops.c line 140
#26 fetch_mail_fetch
at mail-ops.c line 325
#27 mail_msg_received
at mail-mt.c line 570
#28 thread_dispatch
at e-msgport.c line 987
#29 start_thread
from /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libpthread.so.0
#30 clone
from /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libc.so.6

Comment 1 André Klapper 2006-08-14 14:16:31 UTC

unique stacktrace, it seems

Comment 2 Karsten Bräckelmann 2006-11-07 20:00:36 UTC

*** Bug 371903 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 3 Karsten Bräckelmann 2006-11-07 20:04:01 UTC

Good stacktrace, got a duplicate. Confirming.

Comment 4 Christian Kirbach 2006-12-11 21:58:58 UTC

*** Bug 384574 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 5 André Klapper 2007-06-28 19:45:24 UTC

*** Bug 451902 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 6 Matt Davey 2007-07-13 09:38:07 UTC

Any update?  This is killing me.  After a recurrence I got bug 456516.

Comment 7 Lucky Wankhede 2007-08-08 09:53:30 UTC

I am not able to get this reproduce.
But it looks to be g_assert problem to me.

Comment 8 Matt Davey 2007-08-08 10:03:32 UTC

I was getting this assert very frequently (6 or more times a day with moderate usage of the GUI).  I ran inside gdb to find which folder was triggering the assert and have disabled indexing on that folder (my mh 'sent' folder).  This appears to have stopped the frequent crashing - too early to be certain, but I'm hopeful.

Comment 9 Lucky Wankhede 2007-08-08 10:28:35 UTC

Created attachment 93265 [details] [review]
A workaround patch

 I think this patch should work..
 Srini can you please have a look at it.
 If its good enough.. 
 Thanks.

Comment 10 Lucky Wankhede 2007-08-08 10:30:15 UTC

Hey srini can you just have a look at it.

Comment 11 Lucky Wankhede 2007-08-08 10:31:46 UTC

Oh sorry I mean srag.

Comment 12 Matt Davey 2007-08-08 10:50:47 UTC

Lucky,
Do you know why this assertion is triggered?  Is it safe to continue execution under these circumstances?

Generally speaking, assertions should only be put into code as sanity checks for conditions that should never occur, so that there is a fast-fail to identify the cause of problems, rather than continuing on and later causing weird problems that are hard to debug.  When you get an assertion triggered, the first thing to do is to understand why.  Don't replace the assertion by an optimistic 'return 0' unless you're sure you know what's going on...

Disclaimer: I don't know my way around Evo internals, so apologies in advance if you're spot on with your solution!

Comment 13 Srinivasa Ragavan 2007-08-09 06:11:50 UTC

We need to solve the main issue. I reject this.

Comment 14 André Klapper 2007-12-03 16:20:32 UTC

*** Bug 498752 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 15 Srinivasa Ragavan 2008-01-21 16:24:40 UTC


*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 348149 ***