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 670263 - Crash under e_book_backend_ews_start_book_view
Crash under e_book_backend_ews_start_book_view
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 661537
Product: evolution-ews
Classification: Other
Component: Contacts (personal addressbooks)
3.2.x
Other Linux
: Normal critical
: ---
Assigned To: Evolution EWS maintainer(s)
Evolution EWS maintainer(s)
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2012-02-17 08:03 UTC by Milan Crha
Modified: 2012-03-02 10:24 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---


Description Milan Crha 2012-02-17 08:03:23 UTC 
Moving this from a downstream bug report:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=794530

[abrt] evolution-data-server-3.2.3-2.fc16: Process /usr/libexec/e-addressbook-factory was killed by signal 11 (SIGSEGV)

libreport version: 2.0.8
abrt_version:   2.0.7
backtrace_rating: 4
cmdline:        /usr/libexec/e-addressbook-factory
crash_function: e_book_backend_sqlitedb_get_is_populated
executable:     /usr/libexec/e-addressbook-factory
kernel:         3.2.6-3.fc16.x86_64
reason:         Process /usr/libexec/e-addressbook-factory was killed by signal
11 (SIGSEGV)
time:           Wed 15 Feb 2012 01:41:07 PM PST

Core was generated by `/usr/libexec/e-addressbook-factory'.
Program terminated with signal 11, Segmentation fault.

+ Trace 229682

Thread 4 (Thread 0x7fdc7ccd6700 (LWP 2552))

  • #0 read
    at ../sysdeps/unix/syscall-template.S line 82
  • #1 read
    at /usr/include/bits/unistd.h line 45
  • #2 unix_signal_helper_thread
    at gmain.c line 4567
  • #3 g_thread_create_proxy
    at gthread.c line 1962
  • #4 start_thread
    at pthread_create.c line 309
  • #5 clone
    at ../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/x86_64/clone.S line 115 






Comment 1


Punit Jain





          2012-03-02 10:24:27 UTC
        



I think this crash is same as in bug 661537. Marking it as duplicate.
Thanks!

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 661537 ***