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 89436 - Installing theme causes crash
Installing theme causes crash
Status: VERIFIED INCOMPLETE
Product: metacity
Classification: Other
Component: EWMH specification
unspecified
Other other
: Normal normal
: ---
Assigned To: Metacity maintainers list
Metacity maintainers list
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2002-07-30 17:04 UTC by proberman
Modified: 2009-08-15 18:40 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---



Description proberman 2002-07-30 17:03:56 UTC
Package: metacity
Severity: normal
Version: 0.6
Synopsis: Installing theme causes crash
Bugzilla-Product: metacity
Bugzilla-Component: EWMH specification
BugBuddy-GnomeVersion: 2.0 (2.0.1)

Description:
Description of Problem:
Every time I try to install a new MetaCity theme it causes MetaCity to
crash.

Steps to reproduce the problem:
1. Open MetaCity	
2. Install theme
3. 

Actual Results:
Crash (Segfault)

Expected Results:
New theme installed

How often does this happen?
Seems to be happening every time.

Additional Information:




Debugging Information:

Backtrace was generated from '/usr//bin/metacity-setup'

(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...
(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...
(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...
(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...
(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...
(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...
(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...
(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...
(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...
(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...
(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...
(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...
(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...
(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...
(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...
(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...
(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...
(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...
(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...
(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...
(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...
(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...
(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...
0x009c95e9 in wait4 () from /lib/i686/libc.so.6
  • #0 wait4
    from /lib/i686/libc.so.6
  • #1 sys_sigabbrev
    from /lib/i686/libc.so.6
  • #2 waitpid
    from /lib/i686/libpthread.so.0
  • #3 gnome_scores_display_with_pixmap
    from /usr/lib/libgnomeui-2.so.0




------- Bug moved to this database by unknown@bugzilla.gnome.org 2002-07-30 13:03 -------

The original reporter (proberman@excite.com) of this bug does not have an account here.
Reassigning to the exporter, unknown@bugzilla.gnome.org.
Reassigning to the default owner of the component, hp@redhat.com.

Comment 1 Luis Villa 2002-07-31 20:50:57 UTC
That trace is pretty useless and looks corrupted. Where are you
getting your packages? While the trace itself is unfortunately not
very useful, having information about where you got the packages may
help us track them down and make sure they aren't using weird
optimizations or something.
Comment 2 Elijah Newren 2002-12-03 21:49:50 UTC
Hi, we've found several more reports similar to yours and haven't been
able to track it down.  Could you please go to 
  http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=100272
and mention that you were the reporter of bug 89436, and then tell us
what distribution you were using (or, if compiling yourself, what
compiler version and options)?  Thanks.

I'm going to just close this instead of reopening and marking as a
duplicate--I've already mentioned this bug in 100272.