nautilus exits during drive removal, no apport reporter comes up

Bug #651868 reported by steubens
6
This bug affects 1 person
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
Nautilus
New
Undecided
Unassigned
nautilus (Ubuntu)
Confirmed
Medium
Unassigned

Bug Description

Binary package hint: nautilus

these messages end up in dmesg/logs:

[81747.416622] nautilus[9955] general protection ip:44c59f sp:7fff7977e300 error:0 in nautilus[400000+1b9000]

its a crash ... i just couldn't place why; and as in summary, not caught by apport for reporting, i _think_ it might be a security related exit (apparmor) or a voluntary seppuku by some runtime error checking facilities of the libc/gcc

ProblemType: Bug
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 10.10
Package: nautilus 1:2.32.0-0ubuntu1
ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 2.6.35-22.33-generic 2.6.35.4
Uname: Linux 2.6.35-22-generic x86_64
Architecture: amd64
Date: Thu Sep 30 01:27:22 2010
ProcEnviron:
 PATH=(custom, user)
 LANG=en_US.utf8
 SHELL=/bin/bash
SourcePackage: nautilus

Revision history for this message
steubens (steubens) wrote :
Revision history for this message
steubens (steubens) wrote :

[11146.196735] nautilus[1987]: segfault at 20 ip 000000000044c59f sp 00007fff88791110 error 4 in nautilus[400000+1b9000]

first one of these, though i ejected the drive with the chevron this time, not with right click -> safely remove

Revision history for this message
Pedro Villavicencio (pedro) wrote :

Thank you taking the time to report this bug and helping to make Ubuntu better. Please try to obtain a backtrace manually following the instructions at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/DebuggingProgramCrash and upload the backtrace (as an attachment) to the bug report. This will greatly help us in tracking down your problem.

Changed in nautilus (Ubuntu):
importance: Undecided → Medium
status: New → Incomplete
Revision history for this message
steubens (steubens) wrote :
Download full text (9.5 KiB)

Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
nautilus_path_bar_size_allocate (widget=0x1880f40, allocation=<value optimized out>) at nautilus-pathbar.c:669

other threads in process were boring, here's the faulting thread:

#0 nautilus_path_bar_size_allocate (widget=0x2c43500, allocation=<value optimized out>) at nautilus-pathbar.c:669
#1 0x00007f8a65f309b9 in g_closure_invoke (closure=0x253bd70, return_value=0x0, n_param_values=2, param_values=0x2c3b6f0, invocation_hint=0x7fff32639790) at /build/buildd/glib2.0-2.26.0/gobject/gclosure.c:766
#2 0x00007f8a65f45da1 in signal_emit_unlocked_R (node=0x25587a0, detail=<value optimized out>, instance=<value optimized out>, emission_return=<value optimized out>, instance_and_params=<value optimized out>)
    at /build/buildd/glib2.0-2.26.0/gobject/gsignal.c:3182
#3 0x00007f8a65f47996 in g_signal_emit_valist (instance=0x2a17b20, signal_id=<value optimized out>, detail=0, var_args=0x7fff32639980) at /build/buildd/glib2.0-2.26.0/gobject/gsignal.c:2983
#4 0x00007f8a65f47f53 in g_signal_emit (instance=0x2, signal_id=0, detail=3) at /build/buildd/glib2.0-2.26.0/gobject/gsignal.c:3040
#5 0x00007f8a672c0217 in gtk_widget_size_allocate () from /usr/lib/libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0
#6 0x00007f8a670ed3c5 in ?? () from /usr/lib/libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0
#7 0x00007f8a65f309b9 in g_closure_invoke (closure=0x253bd70, return_value=0x0, n_param_values=2, param_values=0x2c3b560, invocation_hint=0x7fff32639ca0) at /build/buildd/glib2.0-2.26.0/gobject/gclosure.c:766
#8 0x00007f8a65f45da1 in signal_emit_unlocked_R (node=0x25587a0, detail=<value optimized out>, instance=<value optimized out>, emission_return=<value optimized out>, instance_and_params=<value optimized out>)
    at /build/buildd/glib2.0-2.26.0/gobject/gsignal.c:3182
#9 0x00007f8a65f47996 in g_signal_emit_valist (instance=0x2917130, signal_id=<value optimized out>, detail=0, var_args=0x7fff32639e90) at /build/buildd/glib2.0-2.26.0/gobject/gsignal.c:2983
#10 0x00007f8a65f47f53 in g_signal_emit (instance=0x2, signal_id=0, detail=3) at /build/buildd/glib2.0-2.26.0/gobject/gsignal.c:3040
#11 0x00007f8a672c0217 in gtk_widget_size_allocate () from /usr/lib/libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0
#12 0x00007f8a670ed3c5 in ?? () from /usr/lib/libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0
#13 0x00007f8a65f309b9 in g_closure_invoke (closure=0x253bd70, return_value=0x0, n_param_values=2, param_values=0x2c844c0, invocation_hint=0x7fff3263a1b0) at /build/buildd/glib2.0-2.26.0/gobject/gclosure.c:766
#14 0x00007f8a65f45da1 in signal_emit_unlocked_R (node=0x25587a0, detail=<value optimized out>, instance=<value optimized out>, emission_return=<value optimized out>, instance_and_params=<value optimized out>)
    at /build/buildd/glib2.0-2.26.0/gobject/gsignal.c:3182
#15 0x00007f8a65f47996 in g_signal_emit_valist (instance=0x29170a0, signal_id=<value optimized out>, detail=0, var_args=0x7fff3263a3a0) at /build/buildd/glib2.0-2.26.0/gobject/gsignal.c:2983
#16 0x00007f8a65f47f53 in g_signal_emit (instance=0x2, signal_id=0, detail=3) at /build/buildd/glib2.0-2.26.0/gobject/gsignal.c:3040
#17 0x00007f8a672c0217 in gtk_widget_size_allocate () from /usr/lib/libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0
#18 0x00007f8a671cca74 in ?? () from /usr/lib/li...

Read more...

Revision history for this message
steubens (steubens) wrote :

that wiki page should be updated with the new ptrace restrictions in maverick, too

Revision history for this message
steubens (steubens) wrote :

a recent update stopped this from occurring, it was not to nautilus; i do not know what package it was. will reopen if it occurs again

Changed in nautilus (Ubuntu):
status: Incomplete → Fix Released
Revision history for this message
steubens (steubens) wrote :

i _always_ speak too soon, it just happened again; it hadn't done it for several ejections in one session and i assumed it was gone, since it had done it for every ejection within' about 4 days before i reported it

Changed in nautilus (Ubuntu):
status: Fix Released → New
Revision history for this message
Omer Akram (om26er) wrote :

I have been seeing this issue for quite a few days now.

Changed in nautilus (Ubuntu):
status: New → Confirmed
Revision history for this message
Sebastien Bacher (seb128) wrote :

The bug is an upstream one and should be send to GNOME

Revision history for this message
Omer Akram (om26er) wrote :

Thank you for taking the time to report this bug and helping to make Ubuntu better. This particular bug has already been reported and is a duplicate of bug 630884, so it 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. Feel free to continue to report any other bugs you may find.

Revision history for this message
Omer Akram (om26er) wrote :

I was reporting it upstream and with the stack trace in comment#4 and bugzilla detected the same crash is already reported and the bugzilla bug pointed to bug 630884

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.