nautilus crashed with SIGABRT in g_object_newv()

Bug #893818 reported by Andrew Young
10
This bug affects 1 person
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
brasero (Ubuntu)
New
Undecided
Unassigned

Bug Description

Crashed up start

ProblemType: Crash
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 11.04
Package: brasero 2.32.1-0ubuntu2
ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 2.6.38-12.51-generic 2.6.38.8
Uname: Linux 2.6.38-12-generic i686
NonfreeKernelModules: fglrx
Architecture: i386
Date: Tue Nov 22 18:09:19 2011
EcryptfsInUse: Yes
ExecutablePath: /usr/bin/nautilus
InstallationMedia: Ubuntu 10.04.3 LTS "Lucid Lynx" - Release i386 (20110720.1)
ProcCmdline: nautilus
ProcEnviron:
 LANG=en_US.utf8
 SHELL=/bin/bash
Signal: 6
SourcePackage: brasero
StacktraceTop:
 ?? () from /usr/lib/i386-linux-gnu/libgio-2.0.so.0
 ?? () from /usr/lib/i386-linux-gnu/libgio-2.0.so.0
 g_object_newv () from /usr/lib/i386-linux-gnu/libgobject-2.0.so.0
 g_object_new_valist () from /usr/lib/i386-linux-gnu/libgobject-2.0.so.0
 g_object_new () from /usr/lib/i386-linux-gnu/libgobject-2.0.so.0
Title: nautilus crashed with SIGABRT in g_object_newv()
UpgradeStatus: Upgraded to natty on 2011-11-22 (0 days ago)
UserGroups: adm admin cdrom dialout lpadmin plugdev sambashare
XsessionErrors:
 (gnome-settings-daemon:1675): GdkPixbuf-CRITICAL **: gdk_pixbuf_format_get_name: assertion `format != NULL' failed
 (gnome-settings-daemon:1675): GdkPixbuf-CRITICAL **: gdk_pixbuf_format_get_name: assertion `format != NULL' failed
 (<unknown>:1696): dee-WARNING **: Transaction from com.canonical.Unity.ApplicationsPlace.SectionsModel is in the past. Ignoring transaction.
 (<unknown>:1696): dee-WARNING **: Transaction from com.canonical.Unity.ApplicationsPlace.GroupsModel is in the past. Ignoring transaction.

Revision history for this message
Andrew Young (apyoung88) wrote :
Revision history for this message
Apport retracing service (apport) wrote : This bug is a duplicate

Thank you for taking the time to report this crash and helping to make this software better. This particular crash has already been reported and is a duplicate of bug #739285, so is being marked as such. Please look at the other bug report to see if there is any missing information that you can provide, or to see if there is a workaround for the bug. Additionally, any further discussion regarding the bug should occur in the other report. Please continue to report any other bugs you may find.

visibility: private → public
visibility: private → public
tags: removed: need-i386-retrace
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.