emerald crashed with SIGSEGV in gdk_gc_new_with_values()

Bug #199911 reported by Gugiwuz
12
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
emerald (Ubuntu)
Confirmed
Undecided
Unassigned

Bug Description

Binary package hint: emerald

crash happened in ubuntu hardy; emerald 0.7.2-0ubuntu1 + Ati driver 8.3
occurs when fast switching between windows with alt+tab:

DISTRIB_ID=Ubuntu
DISTRIB_RELEASE=8.04
DISTRIB_CODENAME=hardy
DISTRIB_DESCRIPTION="Ubuntu hardy (development branch)"

ProblemType: Crash
Architecture: i386
CrashCounter: 1
Date: Sat Mar 8 17:10:19 2008
Disassembly: 0x0:
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 8.04
ExecutablePath: /usr/bin/emerald
NonfreeKernelModules: fglrx cdrom
Package: emerald 0.7.2-0ubuntu1
PackageArchitecture: i386
ProcCmdline: /usr/bin/emerald --replace
ProcCwd: /home/mani
ProcEnviron:
 PATH=/usr/local/sbin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin:/sbin:/bin:/usr/games
 LANG=de_AT.UTF-8
 SHELL=/bin/bash
Signal: 11
SourcePackage: emerald
StacktraceTop:
 ?? ()
 gdk_gc_new_with_values () from /usr/lib/libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0
 gdk_gc_new () from /usr/lib/libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0
 ?? ()
 ?? ()
Title: emerald crashed with SIGSEGV in gdk_gc_new_with_values()
Uname: Linux 2.6.24-11-generic i686
UserGroups: adm admin audio cdrom dialout dip floppy lpadmin netdev plugdev powerdev scanner video

Revision history for this message
Gugiwuz (manuel-laggner-gmail) wrote :
Revision history for this message
Benjamin_L (benjamin-lebsanft) wrote :

Can confirm this on latest hardy and radeon drivers.

Changed in emerald:
status: New → Confirmed
Revision history for this message
Kjell Braden (afflux) wrote :

I retraced locally since the retracing service seems broken and it seems like this bug is the a duplicate of bug 139877.

Revision history for this message
Test-tools (roland-verifysoft) wrote :

Hello,
this very much looks like bug 139877.
We need the caller of gdk_gc_new(), to identify the code to add that additional checks, if that still happens..
Roland

Revision history for this message
Kjell Braden (afflux) wrote :

Roland, I can't retrace it anymore, but if I'm not wrong the backtraces were the same as in bug 139877, which means it should be fixed now.

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.