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 556096 - Evolution crashed : just after renaming a calendar
Evolution crashed : just after renaming a calendar
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 333224
Product: evolution
Classification: Applications
Component: Calendar
2.24.x (obsolete)
Other Linux
: Normal critical
: ---
Assigned To: evolution-calendar-maintainers
Evolution QA team
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2008-10-13 06:49 UTC by Akhil Laddha
Modified: 2008-12-09 18:13 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: 2.21/2.22


Description Akhil Laddha 2008-10-13 06:49:17 UTC 
Evolution 2.25.1 (Exchange back end)

Gdb traces of evolution


Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
[Switching to Thread 0xb62e56e0 (LWP 7277)]
0xb5ffd507 in e_calendar_view_get_tooltips (data=0x9572860) at e-calendar-view.c:2168
2168		client = pevent->comp_data->client;
(gdb) t a a bt

+ Trace 208089

Thread 1 (Thread 0xb62e56e0 (LWP 7277))

  • #0 e_calendar_view_get_tooltips
    at e-calendar-view.c line 2168
  • #1 g_timeout_dispatch
    at gmain.c line 3253
  • #2 IA__g_main_context_dispatch
    at gmain.c line 1814
  • #3 g_main_context_iterate
    at gmain.c line 2448
  • #4 IA__g_main_loop_run
    at gmain.c line 2656
  • #5 bonobo_main
    at bonobo-main.c line 311
  • #6 main
    at main.c line 689
  • #0 e_calendar_view_get_tooltips
    at e-calendar-view.c line 2168
  • #1 g_timeout_dispatch
    at gmain.c line 3253
  • #2 IA__g_main_context_dispatch
    at gmain.c line 1814
  • #3 g_main_context_iterate
    at gmain.c line 2448
  • #4 IA__g_main_loop_run
    at gmain.c line 2656
  • #5 bonobo_main
    at bonobo-main.c line 311
  • #6 main
    at main.c line 689 






Comment 1


Akhil Laddha





          2008-10-13 06:51:44 UTC
        



looks dup of bug 333224






Comment 2


Milan Crha





          2008-12-09 18:13:35 UTC
        



Yes, it seems it is. Marking as such.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 333224 ***