console-kit-daemon crashed with SIGSEGV in g_str_hash()

[Graham Inggs]

Binary package hint: consolekit

I received this error after installing all the RC updates and restarting.
(0.2.10-1ubuntu9) intrepid

ProblemType: Crash
Architecture: amd64
CrashCounter: 1
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 8.10
ExecutablePath: /usr/sbin/console-kit-daemon
NonfreeKernelModules: nvidia
Package: consolekit 0.2.10-1ubuntu9
ProcAttrCurrent: unconfined
ProcCmdline: /usr/sbin/console-kit-daemon
ProcEnviron:

Signal: 11
SourcePackage: consolekit
StacktraceTop:
 g_str_hash () from /usr/lib/libglib-2.0.so.0
 ?? () from /usr/lib/libglib-2.0.so.0
 ?? ()
 ?? ()
 ?? ()
Title: console-kit-daemon crashed with SIGSEGV in g_str_hash()
Uname: Linux 2.6.27-7-generic x86_64
UserGroups:

[James Westby (james-w)]

Hi,

Thanks for the bug report. It has been marked as a duplicate of a
bug we have deemed to have been fixed (but not marked "Fix
Released" yet, as they have slightly different stacktraces).

Martin, how reliable is the version number of the package given
by apport? Is it possible that this crash was from before the restart,
and the version number was assigned afterwards? If so then the bug
may still be fixed, as this is the only report I can find with the patched
version.

Thanks,

James

[Martin Pitt (pitti)]

James Westby [2008-10-29 14:25 -0000]:
> Martin, how reliable is the version number of the package given
> by apport?

It's the version currently installed, as reported by apt.

> Is it possible that this crash was from before the restart, and the
> version number was assigned afterwards?

Yes, if the user had a long running session.

Unfortunately all attachments from this bug report are gone, otherwise
we could have seen some md5 inconsistencies.

[James Westby (james-w)]

On Wed, 2008-10-29 at 15:37 +0000, Martin Pitt wrote:
> *** This bug is a duplicate of bug 286766 ***
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/286766
>
> James Westby [2008-10-29 14:25 -0000]:
> > Martin, how reliable is the version number of the package given
> > by apport?
>
> It's the version currently installed, as reported by apt.
>
> > Is it possible that this crash was from before the restart, and the
> > version number was assigned afterwards?
>
> Yes, if the user had a long running session.
>
> Unfortunately all attachments from this bug report are gone, otherwise
> we could have seen some md5 inconsistencies.

Thanks,

I'll assume that the bug is still fixed, as there is only this report
with the patched version, and keep an eye out for more.

Thanks,

James