GNOME Bugzilla – Bug 721061
Crashes when trying to add a Twitter or Yahoo! account
Last modified: 2014-03-05 12:25:18 UTC
This is on Mageia 4beta2 with gnome-control-center 3.10.2 and gnome-online-accounts 3.10.2. When I try to add a new online account, I get this crash: $ gdb gnome-control-center GNU gdb (GDB) 7.6-6.mga4 (Mageia release 4) Copyright (C) 2013 Free Software Foundation, Inc. License GPLv3+: GNU GPL version 3 or later <http://gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html> This is free software: you are free to change and redistribute it. There is NO WARRANTY, to the extent permitted by law. Type "show copying" and "show warranty" for details. This GDB was configured as "x86_64-mageia-linux-gnu". For bug reporting instructions, please see: <http://www.gnu.org/software/gdb/bugs/>... Reading symbols from /usr/bin/gnome-control-center...Reading symbols from /usr/lib/debug/usr/bin/gnome-control-center.debug...done. done. (gdb) run Starting program: /usr/bin/gnome-control-center [Thread debugging using libthread_db enabled] Using host libthread_db library "/lib64/libthread_db.so.1". [New Thread 0x7fffdae65700 (LWP 12295)] Detaching after fork from child process 12297. Detaching after fork from child process 12298. [New Thread 0x7fffd97d7700 (LWP 12299)] [New Thread 0x7fffd1a84700 (LWP 12300)] (gnome-control-center:12287): GoaBackend-CRITICAL **: goa_provider_get_provider_features: assertion 'GOA_PROVIDER_GET_CLASS (provider)->get_provider_features != NULL' failed (gnome-control-center:12287): GoaBackend-CRITICAL **: goa_provider_get_provider_features: assertion 'GOA_PROVIDER_GET_CLASS (provider)->get_provider_features != NULL' failed (gnome-control-center:12287): GoaBackend-CRITICAL **: goa_provider_get_provider_features: assertion 'GOA_PROVIDER_GET_CLASS (provider)->get_provider_features != NULL' failed (gnome-control-center:12287): GoaBackend-CRITICAL **: goa_provider_get_provider_features: assertion 'GOA_PROVIDER_GET_CLASS (provider)->get_provider_features != NULL' failed (gnome-control-center:12287): GoaBackend-CRITICAL **: goa_provider_get_provider_features: assertion 'GOA_PROVIDER_GET_CLASS (provider)->get_provider_features != NULL' failed Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault. 0x0000000000000000 in ?? () (gdb) bt
+ Trace 232956
crash, so setting importance: critical.
In case this helps, here's as far as I can get with gdb. The following happened after going through a whole bunch of other providers, the last one being imapsmtp: (gdb) s 302 g_return_val_if_fail (GOA_IS_PROVIDER (provider), GOA_PROVIDER_GROUP_INVALID); (gdb) s goa_provider_get_type () at goaprovider.c:92 92 G_DEFINE_ABSTRACT_TYPE (GoaProvider, goa_provider, G_TYPE_OBJECT); (gdb) n goa_provider_get_provider_group (provider=0x21d1dd0) at goaprovider.c:303 303 return GOA_PROVIDER_GET_CLASS (provider)->get_provider_group (provider); (gdb) s 304 } (gdb) x/10x provider 0x21d1dd0: 0x0219b050 0x00000000 0x00000002 0x00000000 0x21d1de0: 0x00000000 0x00000000 0x021d1dc0 0x00000000 0x21d1df0: 0x00000000 0x00000000 (gdb) s 303 return GOA_PROVIDER_GET_CLASS (provider)->get_provider_group (provider); (gdb) s 304 } (gdb) s 303 return GOA_PROVIDER_GET_CLASS (provider)->get_provider_group (provider); (gdb) s Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault. 0x0000000000000000 in ?? () I can reliably reproduce this, so if there's any patches or other tests people need trying, please let me know...
Same behavior here. I can confirm this.
I can confirm this on Gentoo, running gnome-3.10.2 with gnome-online-accounts-3.10.2, when trying to add a twitter account specifically.
Is this only about Twitter or Yahoo!? Those are not meant to be used because there is no application that makes use of them, so letting a user add those accounts is useless. This is why they are not enabled by default.
Yep, you're quite right, this appears to be because of --enable-twitter, without that the add dialog shows up without a problem. If the feature is experimental and/or not supported, perhaps it should be marked as such in the configure script, or not included in stable code releases?
(In reply to comment #6) > If the feature is experimental and/or not supported, perhaps it should be > marked as such in the configure script, Well, that is why it is not enabled by default. > or not included in stable code > releases? We used to remove them from the stable releases (3.8.x, 3.6.x). It being in 3.10.x is an oversight. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 695236 ***
> We used to remove them from the stable releases (3.8.x, 3.6.x). It being in > 3.10.x is an oversight. Given that it was explicitly stated in bug 695236 comment 9 that the code is unsupported, it would be best to move the feature to a separate branch so that it can't end up in stable. Leaving it in master to have a year old bug repeatedly duplicated seems like it wastes everybody's time.