gnome-terminal seg faults while upgrading to edgy

Bug #82089 reported by Glyphobet on 2007-01-29
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
gnome-terminal (Ubuntu)
Ubuntu Desktop Bugs

Bug Description

Binary package hint: gnome-terminal

This has happened to me twice, on two different machines, when upgrading from Ubuntu 6.06 ("dapper") to Ubuntu 6.10 ("edgy"). My guess would be that this is due to mismatches between libraries as some have been upgraded and others have not yet been, but who knows.

Distribution: Ubuntu 6.06 (dapper)
Gnome Release: 2.16.1 2006-10-02 (Ubuntu)
BugBuddy Version: 2.16.0

Memory status: size: 32866304 vsize: 0 resident: 32866304 share: 0 rss:
10805248 rss_rlim: 0
CPU usage: start_time: 1167436308 rtime: 0 utime: 27388 stime: 0 cutime:24524
cstime: 0 timeout: 2864 it_real_value: 0 frequency: 0

Backtrace was generated from '/usr/bin/gnome-terminal'

(no debugging symbols found)
Using host libthread_db library "/lib/tls/i686/cmov/".
(no debugging symbols found)
0xffffe410 in __kernel_vsyscall ()
#0 0xffffe410 in __kernel_vsyscall ()
#1 0xb773b48b in ?? ()
#2 0xb7ee3f58 in ?? ()
#3 0x00000000 in ?? ()

Since I'm running update-manager -c from a gnome-terminal, the seg fault causes the upgrade process to die as well, leaving the package manager in a really screwed up state. I managed to fix it by re-running the edgy upgrade program that had been downloaded to /tmp/ several times, and by using aptitude to fix broken packages when the edgy upgrade program could not handle the broken packages.

Sebastien Bacher (seb128) wrote :

Thanks for your bug report. Please try to obtain a debug backtrace and attach the file to the bug report. This will greatly help us in tracking down your problem.

Changed in gnome-terminal:
assignee: nobody → desktop-bugs
status: Unconfirmed → Needs Info
Daniel Holbach (dholbach) wrote :

As described in the previous comments, your report lacks the information we need to investigate the problem further. We'll close this report for now - please reopen it if you can give us the missing information.

Changed in gnome-terminal:
status: Needs Info → Rejected
Glyphobet (glyphobet) wrote :

I did not attempt to provide a backtrace since that would require downgrading to Ubuntu 6.06 (which would probably require a reinstall and possibly reformatting my disk), building debugging packages for gnome-terminal 6.06, and then re-running the upgrade process. That would take all day, or maybe multiple days, and I don't have that kind of free time to have one of my two primary machines out of commission.

If you read the bug report that I submitted to Gnome, and linked from this bug report, you will see that I gave them on Jan 16th exactly the same explanation for why I wasn't going to be able to obtain a backtrace.

In this context, Sebastian Bacher's request on Jan 29th for me to obtain a backtrace seemed so ridiculous to me that I honestly thought it was generated by a robot, and nobody had actually read the details of my bug report. So I ignored it, waiting for a real person.

Sebastien Bacher (seb128) wrote :

I'm not a robot no, we do use stock replies though because we get hundred of desktop bugs a week and the team working on them is small and we need to optimize the workflow. Without a debug backtrace we can't do anything on the bug neither, we don't have the ressource neither to spend a day on a bug which has been reported once and has no detail. Closing bugs because they lack information is ok though, that's likely than other users will hit this as well and one of the bugs might have the required stacktrace

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

Other bug subscribers