Bug 543407 – Evolution crashed : enabled others accounts during local filtering of mails

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 543407 - Evolution crashed : enabled others accounts during local filtering of mails


Summary:	Evolution crashed : enabled others accounts during local filtering of mails


Status:	RESOLVED FIXED

Product:	evolution
Classification:	Applications
Component:	Mailer
Version:	2.24.x (obsolete)
Hardware:	Other Linux

Importance:	Normal blocker
Target Milestone:	---
Assigned To:	evolution-mail-maintainers
QA Contact:	Evolution QA team

URL:
Whiteboard:	evolution[disk-summary]

Depends on:
Blocks:	543389

Reported:	2008-07-17 10:03 UTC by Akhil Laddha
Modified:	2013-09-13 01:00 UTC

See Also:
GNOME target:	---
GNOME version:	2.21/2.22

Description Akhil Laddha 2008-07-17 10:03:15 UTC

Evolution 2.23.5

Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
[Switching to Thread 0xb63e06e0 (LWP 18587)]
g_hash_table_remove_node (hash_table=0x873afb8, node_ptr_ptr=<value optimized out>, notify=1) at ghash.c:198
198	  *node_ptr = node->next;
(gdb) thread a a bt

+ Trace 203060

Thread 1 (Thread 0xb63e06e0 (LWP 18587))

#0 g_hash_table_remove_node
at ghash.c line 198
#1 g_hash_table_foreach_remove_or_steal
at ghash.c line 977
#2 remove_cache
at camel-folder-summary.c line 724
#3 g_timeout_dispatch
at gmain.c line 3527
#4 IA__g_main_context_dispatch
at gmain.c line 2068
#5 g_main_context_iterate
at gmain.c line 2701
#6 IA__g_main_loop_run
at gmain.c line 2924
#7 bonobo_main
at bonobo-main.c line 311
#8 main
at main.c line 783
#0 g_hash_table_remove_node
at ghash.c line 198
#1 g_hash_table_foreach_remove_or_steal
at ghash.c line 977
#2 remove_cache
at camel-folder-summary.c line 724
#3 g_timeout_dispatch
at gmain.c line 3527
#4 IA__g_main_context_dispatch
at gmain.c line 2068
#5 g_main_context_iterate
at gmain.c line 2701
#6 IA__g_main_loop_run
at gmain.c line 2924
#7 bonobo_main
at bonobo-main.c line 311
#8 main
at main.c line 783

Comment 1 Akhil Laddha 2008-07-17 10:17:18 UTC

Valgrind of evolution process


==19261== 
==19261== Invalid read of size 4
==19261==    at 0x59D3242: g_hash_table_remove_node (ghash.c:198)
==19261==    by 0x59D3D00: g_hash_table_foreach_remove_or_steal (ghash.c:977)
==19261==    by 0x428AA7B: remove_cache (camel-folder-summary.c:724)
==19261==    by 0x59E1815: g_timeout_dispatch (gmain.c:3527)
==19261==    by 0x59E10E7: g_main_context_dispatch (gmain.c:2068)
==19261==    by 0x59E4782: g_main_context_iterate (gmain.c:2701)
==19261==    by 0x59E4CA1: g_main_loop_run (gmain.c:2924)
==19261==    by 0x4E7D0A2: bonobo_main (bonobo-main.c:311)
==19261==    by 0x805DD84: main (main.c:783)
==19261==  Address 0x8 is not stack'd, malloc'd or (recently) free'd
==19261== 
==19261== Process terminating with default action of signal 11 (SIGSEGV)
==19261==  Access not within mapped region at address 0x8
==19261==    at 0x59D3242: g_hash_table_remove_node (ghash.c:198)
==19261==    by 0x59D3D00: g_hash_table_foreach_remove_or_steal (ghash.c:977)
==19261==    by 0x428AA7B: remove_cache (camel-folder-summary.c:724)
==19261==    by 0x59E1815: g_timeout_dispatch (gmain.c:3527)
==19261==    by 0x59E10E7: g_main_context_dispatch (gmain.c:2068)
==19261==    by 0x59E4782: g_main_context_iterate (gmain.c:2701)
==19261==    by 0x59E4CA1: g_main_loop_run (gmain.c:2924)
==19261==    by 0x4E7D0A2: bonobo_main (bonobo-main.c:311)
==19261==    by 0x805DD84: main (main.c:783)
==19261==

Comment 2 Akhil Laddha 2008-07-18 05:26:16 UTC

It is happening very frequently. I happened with stand alone Group wise account also.

Comment 3 Srinivasa Ragavan 2008-07-25 04:23:58 UTC

Retry. Lots of things changed here.

Comment 4 Srinivasa Ragavan 2008-07-30 15:14:44 UTC

Reeeetry. Lots of things fixed.

Comment 5 André Klapper 2008-08-26 14:42:56 UTC

Guys, is bug 548902 a duplicate?