chromium-browser crashed with SIGSEGV in gethostbyname2_r()
| Affects | Status | Importance | Assigned to | Milestone | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| chromium-browser (Ubuntu) |
New
|
Undecided
|
Unassigned | ||
Bug Description
Chromium refused to start via the unity launcher directly after login.
Needed some time and clicking for like four times to get it working.
ProblemType: Crash
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 12.04
Package: chromium-browser 17.0.963.
ProcVersionSign
Uname: Linux 3.2.0-17-generic x86_64
ApportVersion: 1.93-0ubuntu2
Architecture: amd64
CheckboxSubmission: 69266ec2d9afabf
CheckboxSystem: 2954e74ba17fb0e
CrashCounter: 1
Date: Fri Feb 24 16:25:30 2012
Desktop-Session:
DESKTOP_SESSION = ubuntu
XDG_CONFIG_DIRS = /etc/xdg/
XDG_DATA_DIRS = /usr/share/
Env:
MOZ_PLUGIN_PATH = None
LD_LIBRARY_PATH = None
ExecutablePath: /usr/lib/
InstallationMedia: Ubuntu 11.10 "Oneiric Ocelot" - Beta amd64 (20110901)
ProcCmdline: /usr/lib/
ProcEnviron:
SegvAnalysis:
Segfault happened at: 0x7f21f7dcdbfe: lock xadd %eax,0x18(%rdi)
PC (0x7f21f7dcdbfe) ok
source "%eax" ok
destination "0x18(%rdi)" (0x00000017) not located in a known VMA region (needed writable region)!
Stack memory exhausted (SP below stack segment)
SegvReason: writing NULL VMA
Signal: 11
SourcePackage: chromium-browser
StacktraceTop:
?? () from /lib/x86_
?? () from /lib/x86_
?? () from /lib/x86_
?? () from /lib/x86_
gethostbyname2_r () from /lib/x86_
Title: chromium-browser crashed with SIGSEGV in gethostbyname2_r()
UpgradeStatus: Upgraded to precise on 2011-12-22 (63 days ago)
UserGroups: adm admin cdrom dialout lp lpadmin plugdev sambashare
chromium-default: CHROMIUM_FLAGS=""
| Maximilian Federle (ppd) wrote | #1 |
| Apport retracing service (apport) wrote This bug is a duplicate | #2 |
| visibility: | private → public |
| visibility: | private → public |
| tags: | removed: need-amd64-retrace |
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 #929219, 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.