GNOME Bugzilla – Bug 421920
Clicking Library or Linux makes gimmie crash
Last modified: 2007-03-25 23:02:54 UTC
Steps to reproduce: 1. Click Library or Linux button while gimmie is running 2. 3. Stack trace: Memory status: size: 0 vsize: 0 resident: 0 share: 0 rss: 0 rss_rlim: 0 CPU usage: start_time: 0 rtime: 0 utime: 0 stime: 0 cutime:0 cstime: 0 timeout: 0 it_real_value: 0 frequency: 0 Traceback (most recent call last):
+ Trace 121476
self.topic_win = self.topic.get_topic_window()
self.topic_window = TopicWindow(self)
self.find_first_button()
filtered = self._filter_items_num_days_ago(items, zoom)
return [x for x in items if self._filter_compare(x, days_ago)]
for i in self.get_items_uncached():
for item in source.get_items_uncached():
yield DriveItem(drive)
raise ValueError, "Cannot find URI to open for drive '%s'" % drive
Other information: I studied at the relevant code lines in gimmie_computer.py and did the following test using command line python: >>> for drive in vol_monitor.get_connected_drives(): ... drive.get_device_path() ... '/dev/hda' get_connected_drives() returns /dev/hda (my DVD-drive) as the only connected device, although my hard drive is /dev/sda. And when I didn't have a disc in the drive, get_mounted_volumes() for that drive returned an empty list, which resulted in the error condition (else statement at line 105). Putting a CD in the drive removed the problem. I run gimmie 0.2.6 on Ubuntu Edgy
Further research: In gimmie_computer.py line 216 we have: for drive in self.vol_monitor.get_connected_drives(): yield DriveItem(drive) And at line 96: uri = drive.get_activation_uri() if not uri: for volume in drive.get_mounted_volumes(): if volume.is_user_visible(): # FIXME: Using the first volume URI for a device is # broken. There could be multiple, though I don't # know under what circumstances this would happen. uri = volume.get_activation_uri() break else: raise ValueError, "Cannot find URI to open for drive '%s'" % drive Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't this mean that Gimmie expects every drive to have at least one mounted, visible volume? I mean, one could of course have an unpartitioned hard drive installed. Wouldn't that result in the same error as well?
Thanks for taking the time to report this bug. This particular bug has already been reported into our bug tracking system, but we are happy to tell you that the problem has already been fixed. It should be solved in the next software version. You may want to check for a software upgrade. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 421620 ***