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 600666 - crash in Evolution Mail and Calendar: somewhat the Evolution ...
crash in Evolution Mail and Calendar: somewhat the Evolution ...
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 588374
Product: evolution
Classification: Applications
Component: BugBuddyBugs
2.26.x (obsolete)
Other All
: Normal critical
: ---
Assigned To: Evolution Triage Team
Evolution QA team
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2009-11-04 11:46 UTC by c.montanari
Modified: 2009-11-04 12:31 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: 2.25/2.26


Description c.montanari 2009-11-04 11:46:26 UTC 
What were you doing when the application crashed?
somewhat  the Evolution Mail application still crashes when synchronising (big) folders.


Distribution: Debian squeeze/sid
Gnome Release: 2.26.1 2009-04-14 (Debian)
BugBuddy Version: 2.26.0

System: Linux 2.6.30-1-686 #1 SMP Sat Aug 15 19:11:58 UTC 2009 i686
X Vendor: The Cygwin/X Project
X Vendor Release: 10503000
Selinux: No
Accessibility: Disabled
GTK+ Theme: Crux
Icon Theme: Crux
GTK+ Modules: gnomebreakpad, canberra-gtk-module

Memory status: size: 195297280 vsize: 195297280 resident: 37142528 share: 20373504 rss: 37142528 rss_rlim: 18446744073709551615
CPU usage: start_time: 1257334818 rtime: 2277 utime: 1780 stime: 497 cutime:0 cstime: 0 timeout: 0 it_real_value: 0 frequency: 100

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

[Thread debugging using libthread_db enabled]
[New Thread 0xadd89b90 (LWP 9217)]
[New Thread 0xaf58cb90 (LWP 9214)]
[New Thread 0xb0f82b90 (LWP 9213)]
[New Thread 0xb1844b90 (LWP 9173)]
[New Thread 0xafdfeb90 (LWP 9170)]
[New Thread 0xb2045b90 (LWP 9142)]
[New Thread 0xb2846b90 (LWP 9141)]
[New Thread 0xb3aadb90 (LWP 9140)]
[New Thread 0xb42aeb90 (LWP 9138)]
[New Thread 0xb52b0b90 (LWP 9136)]
[New Thread 0xb5ab1b90 (LWP 9134)]
0xb809e424 in __kernel_vsyscall ()

+ Trace 218789

Thread 6 (Thread 0xafdfeb90 (LWP 9170))

  • #0 __kernel_vsyscall
  • #1 __lll_lock_wait
    at ../nptl/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/i386/i686/../i486/lowlevellock.S line 136
  • #2 _L_lock_89
    from /lib/i686/cmov/libpthread.so.0
  • #3 __pthread_mutex_lock
    at pthread_mutex_lock.c line 86
  • #4 segv_redirect
    at main.c line 435
  • #5 <signal handler called>
  • #6 summary_update
    at camel-mbox-summary.c line 600
  • #7 mbox_summary_check
    at camel-mbox-summary.c line 677
  • #8 spool_summary_check
    at camel-spool-summary.c line 315
  • #9 camel_local_summary_check
    at camel-local-summary.c line 277
  • #10 local_refresh_info
    at camel-local-folder.c line 491
  • #11 camel_folder_refresh_info
    at camel-folder.c line 349
  • #12 refresh_folder_exec
    at mail-ops.c line 1664
  • #13 mail_msg_proxy
    at mail-mt.c line 520
  • #14 g_thread_pool_thread_proxy
    at /build/buildd-glib2.0_2.20.4-1-i386-6KfM1O/glib2.0-2.20.4/glib/gthreadpool.c line 265
  • #15 g_thread_create_proxy
    at /build/buildd-glib2.0_2.20.4-1-i386-6KfM1O/glib2.0-2.20.4/glib/gthread.c line 635
  • #16 start_thread
    at pthread_create.c line 300
  • #17 clone
    at ../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/i386/clone.S line 130 


----------- .xsession-errors (27 sec old) ---------------------
(evolution:9122): camel-local-provider-WARNING **: spool summary - not loading anything
(evolution:9122): camel-local-provider-WARNING **: spool summary - not loading anything
(evolution:9122): camel-local-provider-WARNING **: spool summary - not loading anything
(evolution:9122): camel-local-provider-WARNING **: spool summary - not loading anything
(evolution:9122): camel-local-provider-WARNING **: spool summary - not loading anything
--------------------------------------------------
Comment 1 Akhil Laddha 2009-11-04 12:31:00 UTC 
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 bug 588374 ***