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 97490 - Crash on delete
Crash on delete
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Product: nautilus
Classification: Core
Component: general
2.1.x
Other other
: High critical
: ---
Assigned To: Nautilus Maintainers
Nautilus Maintainers
: 77928 114904 (view as bug list)
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2002-11-02 16:40 UTC by Andrew Sobala
Modified: 2004-12-22 21:47 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: 2.1/2.2


Description Andrew Sobala 2002-11-02 16:38:23 UTC 
Package: nautilus
Severity: critical
Version: GNOME2.1.0 2.1.2
Synopsis: Crash on delete
Bugzilla-Product: nautilus
Bugzilla-Component: general
BugBuddy-GnomeVersion: 2.0 (2.1.1)
Description:
Description of Problem:
I duplicated the anjuta source code 3 times, r-clicked on the first
copy, and chose delete.


Debugging Information:

Backtrace was generated from '/gnome/head/INSTALL/bin/nautilus'

[New Thread 8192 (LWP 12253)]
[New Thread 16385 (LWP 12254)]
[New Thread 8194 (LWP 12255)]
[New Thread 16387 (LWP 12256)]
[New Thread 24580 (LWP 12257)]
[New Thread 32773 (LWP 12258)]
[New Thread 40966 (LWP 12259)]
[New Thread 49159 (LWP 12260)]
[New Thread 57352 (LWP 12261)]
[New Thread 65545 (LWP 12262)]
[New Thread 73738 (LWP 12263)]
0x420ae169 in wait4 () from /lib/i686/libc.so.6

+ Trace 29775

Thread 11 (Thread 73738 (LWP 12263))

  • #0 sigsuspend
    from /lib/i686/libc.so.6
  • #1 __pthread_wait_for_restart_signal
    from /lib/i686/libpthread.so.0
  • #2 pthread_cond_wait
    from /lib/i686/libpthread.so.0
  • #3 gnome_vfs_thread_pool_wait_for_work
    at gnome-vfs-thread-pool.c line 158
  • #4 thread_entry
    at gnome-vfs-thread-pool.c line 172
  • #5 g_thread_create_proxy
    at gthread.c line 549
  • #6 pthread_start_thread
    from /lib/i686/libpthread.so.0

Thread 10 (Thread 65545 (LWP 12262))

  • #0 sigsuspend
    from /lib/i686/libc.so.6
  • #1 __pthread_wait_for_restart_signal
    from /lib/i686/libpthread.so.0
  • #2 pthread_cond_wait
    from /lib/i686/libpthread.so.0
  • #3 gnome_vfs_thread_pool_wait_for_work
    at gnome-vfs-thread-pool.c line 158
  • #4 thread_entry
    at gnome-vfs-thread-pool.c line 172
  • #5 g_thread_create_proxy
    at gthread.c line 549
  • #6 pthread_start_thread
    from /lib/i686/libpthread.so.0

Thread 9 (Thread 57352 (LWP 12261))

  • #0 sigsuspend
    from /lib/i686/libc.so.6
  • #1 __pthread_wait_for_restart_signal
    from /lib/i686/libpthread.so.0
  • #2 pthread_cond_wait
    from /lib/i686/libpthread.so.0
  • #3 job_notify
    at gnome-vfs-job.c line 183
  • #4 xfer_callback
    at gnome-vfs-job.c line 1484
  • #5 call_progress
    at gnome-vfs-xfer.c line 159
  • #6 gnome_vfs_xfer_private
    at gnome-vfs-xfer.c line 2248
  • #7 execute_xfer
    at gnome-vfs-job.c line 1500 




------- Bug moved to this database by unknown@bugzilla.gnome.org 2002-11-02 11:38 -------

Reassigning to the default owner of the component, nautilus-maint@bugzilla.gnome.org.
Comment 1 Elijah Newren 2002-11-03 04:54:41 UTC 
*** Bug 77928 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 2 Elijah Newren 2002-11-03 04:57:41 UTC 
While the stack trace doesn't match the stack trace in bug #77928
perfectly, it is a pretty close match.  The steps reported to get the
crashes are also very similar.  I think the differences might be
explained by the slightly different versions of the software as well
as the different architectures (bug #77928 was reported for sparc).

As you can see above, I decided to mark #77928 as a duplicate of this
one--since the stack trace here has symbols.

Marking this bug as new.  And raising the priority to high (#77928's
priority was high).
Comment 3 Dave Camp 2002-12-08 01:42:38 UTC 
I can reproduce this:

* Create a file (we'll call it 'foo').
* Duplicate the file (you get 'foo (Copy)').
* Trash the file
* Create another 'foo'
* Trash that
* Boom.
Comment 4 Dave Camp 2003-01-13 04:39:01 UTC 
(I have a patch for this, but it needs a bit of polishing and probably
some review before I put it in)
Comment 5 Dave Camp 2003-02-10 19:34:08 UTC 
I committed this patch.
Comment 6 Elijah Newren 2003-06-12 02:31:33 UTC 
*** Bug 114904 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***