soffice.bin crashed with SIGSEGV in JNI_CreateJavaVM()

Bug #1795956 reported by Seth Forshee
10
This bug affects 1 person
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
libreoffice (Ubuntu)
Invalid
Undecided
Unassigned

Bug Description

Steps to reproduce, copied from bug #1699772:

You need to install libreoffice-base (which is not installed by default, and pulls in all the java dependencies), then run it with "libreoffice --base", go through the initial wizard to create a new HSQLDB database, and that's when the crash happens.

ProblemType: Crash
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 18.10
Package: libreoffice-core 1:6.1.1-0ubuntu1
ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 4.18.0-7.8-generic 4.18.5
Uname: Linux 4.18.0-7-generic i686
ApportVersion: 2.20.10-0ubuntu11
Architecture: i386
CrashCounter: 1
CurrentDesktop: ubuntu:GNOME
Date: Wed Oct 3 15:00:49 2018
ExecutablePath: /usr/lib/libreoffice/program/soffice.bin
InstallationDate: Installed on 2018-09-28 (5 days ago)
InstallationMedia: Ubuntu 16.04.5 LTS "Xenial Xerus" - Release i386 (20180731)
ProcCmdline: /usr/lib/libreoffice/program/soffice.bin --base --splash-pipe=5
SegvAnalysis:
 Segfault happened at: 0x95c830b9: movb $0x0,(%eax)
 PC (0x95c830b9) ok
 source "$0x0" ok
 destination "(%eax)" (0xbf3fbfe0) not located in a known VMA region (needed writable region)!
 Stack memory exhausted (SP below stack segment)
SegvReason: writing unknown VMA
Signal: 11
SourcePackage: libreoffice
StacktraceTop:
 ?? () from /usr/lib/jvm/java-11-openjdk-i386/lib/server/libjvm.so
 ?? () from /usr/lib/jvm/java-11-openjdk-i386/lib/server/libjvm.so
 ?? () from /usr/lib/jvm/java-11-openjdk-i386/lib/server/libjvm.so
 ?? () from /usr/lib/jvm/java-11-openjdk-i386/lib/server/libjvm.so
 JNI_CreateJavaVM () from /usr/lib/jvm/java-11-openjdk-i386/lib/server/libjvm.so
Title: soffice.bin crashed with SIGSEGV in JNI_CreateJavaVM()
UpgradeStatus: Upgraded to cosmic on 2018-09-28 (5 days ago)
UserGroups: adm cdrom dip lpadmin plugdev sambashare sudo

Revision history for this message
Seth Forshee (sforshee) wrote :
Revision history for this message
Seth Forshee (sforshee) wrote :

Seems to be a stack overflow:

bfbd4000-bfbf5000 rw-p 00000000 00:00 0 [stack]
eax 0xbf3fbfe0 -1086341152
esp 0xbf3fbfe0 0xbf3fbfe0
=> 0x95c830b9: movb $0x0,(%eax)

Revision history for this message
Apport retracing service (apport) wrote :

StacktraceTop:
 ?? () from /tmp/apport_sandbox_48vihlyu/usr/lib/jvm/java-11-openjdk-i386/lib/server/libjvm.so
 ?? () from /tmp/apport_sandbox_48vihlyu/usr/lib/jvm/java-11-openjdk-i386/lib/server/libjvm.so
 ?? () from /tmp/apport_sandbox_48vihlyu/usr/lib/jvm/java-11-openjdk-i386/lib/server/libjvm.so
 ?? () from /tmp/apport_sandbox_48vihlyu/usr/lib/jvm/java-11-openjdk-i386/lib/server/libjvm.so
 ?? () from /tmp/apport_sandbox_48vihlyu/usr/lib/jvm/java-11-openjdk-i386/lib/server/libjvm.so

Revision history for this message
Apport retracing service (apport) wrote : Stacktrace.txt
Revision history for this message
Apport retracing service (apport) wrote : StacktraceSource.txt
Revision history for this message
Apport retracing service (apport) wrote : ThreadStacktrace.txt
Changed in libreoffice (Ubuntu):
status: New → Invalid
Revision history for this message
Apport retracing service (apport) wrote : Crash report cannot be processed

Thank you for your report!

However, processing it in order to get sufficient information for the
developers failed (it does not generate a useful symbolic stack trace). This
might be caused by some outdated packages which were installed on your system
at the time of the report:

no debug symbol package found for openjdk-11-jre-headless
no debug symbol package found for libgssapi-krb5-2
no debug symbol package found for libogg0
no debug symbol package found for libkrb5-3
no debug symbol package found for libkrb5support0
no debug symbol package found for libk5crypto3

Please upgrade your system to the latest package versions. If you still
encounter the crash, please file a new report.

Thank you for your understanding, and sorry for the inconvenience!

tags: removed: need-i386-retrace
Revision history for this message
Seth Forshee (sforshee) wrote :

Seems like the issue is actually fairly well established at this point, duping this to 1699772.

To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  
Everyone can see this information.

Other bug subscribers

Remote bug watches

Bug watches keep track of this bug in other bug trackers.