Apache OpenOffice (AOO) Bugzilla – Issue 77361
Crash
Last modified: 2007-12-18 13:38:26 UTC
(I) x.org loaded video driver of... (II) Loading /usr/lib/xorg/modules/drivers/radeon_drv.so (II) Loading /usr/lib/xorg/modules/drivers/ati_drv.so (II) Reloading /usr/lib/xorg/modules/drivers/radeon_drv.so (III) Desktop is: GNOME (IV) libgcj version is: libgcj-4.1.1-51.fc6-i386 (V) kernel is: Linux 2.6.20-1.2948.fc6 #1 SMP Fri Apr 27 18:53:15 EDT 2007 i686 i686 i386 (VI) OpenOffice.org core rpm version is: openoffice.org-core-2.0.4-5.5.22-i386 (VII) depth of root window: 24 planes (VIII) accessibility is: false (VIV) fedora release is: Fedora Core release 6 (Zod) ...start sestatus details ... SELinux status: enabled SELinuxfs mount: /selinux Current mode: enforcing Mode from config file: enforcing Policy version: 21 Policy from config file: targeted ...end sestatus details ... ...start stackreport details ... 0x4da02095: 0x001c0374: /usr/lib/openoffice.org2.0/program/libuno_sal.so.3 + 0x23095 0x4da02dfb: 0x001c0374: /usr/lib/openoffice.org2.0/program/libuno_sal.so.3 + 0x23dfb 0x004d9420: 0x00000000: + 0x420 (__kernel_sigreturn + 0x0) 0x4ccaf410: 0x00138d9c: /lib/libc.so.6 + 0xb2410 (freeaddrinfo + 0x30) 0x4cd8e198: 0x0001d714: /usr/lib/libneon.so.25 + 0xe198 (ne_addr_destroy + 0x28) 0x4cd895f3: 0x0001d714: /usr/lib/libneon.so.25 + 0x95f3 (ne_session_destroy + 0xa3) 0x0369e0c4: 0x0001d614: /usr/lib/gnome-vfs-2.0/modules/libhttp.so + 0x80c4 0x46e5a4e7: 0x0009d0bc: /lib/libglib-2.0.so.0 + 0x1e4e7 0x46e5a6e0: 0x0009d0bc: /lib/libglib-2.0.so.0 + 0x1e6e0 0x0369e26b: 0x0001d614: /usr/lib/gnome-vfs-2.0/modules/libhttp.so + 0x826b 0x46e67a16: 0x0009d0bc: /lib/libglib-2.0.so.0 + 0x2ba16 0x46e67442: 0x0009d0bc: /lib/libglib-2.0.so.0 + 0x2b442 (g_main_context_dispatch + 0x182) 0x46e6a41f: 0x0009d0bc: /lib/libglib-2.0.so.0 + 0x2e41f 0x46e6a985: 0x0009d0bc: /lib/libglib-2.0.so.0 + 0x2e985 (g_main_context_iteration + 0x65) 0x00383c21: 0x000433ec: /usr/lib/openoffice.org2.0/program/libvclplug_gtk680li.so + 0x11c21 0x00f787c7: 0x0006d6b0: /usr/lib/openoffice.org2.0/program/libvclplug_gen680li.so + 0x517c7 (X11SalInstance::Yield(bool, bool) + 0x37) 0x4f4f76b8: 0x0035fd1c: /usr/lib/openoffice.org2.0/program/libvcl680li.so + 0x956b8 (Application::Yield(bool) + 0x68) 0x4f4f778c: 0x0035fd1c: /usr/lib/openoffice.org2.0/program/libvcl680li.so + 0x9578c (Application::Execute() + 0x3c) 0x4ff85289: 0x000576ec: /usr/lib/openoffice.org2.0/program/libsoffice.so + 0x26289 (desktop::Desktop::Main() + 0x1779) 0x4f4fd25c: 0x0035fd1c: /usr/lib/openoffice.org2.0/program/libvcl680li.so + 0x9b25c 0x4f4fd365: 0x0035fd1c: /usr/lib/openoffice.org2.0/program/libvcl680li.so + 0x9b365 (SVMain() + 0x35) 0x4ff76979: 0x000576ec: /usr/lib/openoffice.org2.0/program/libsoffice.so + 0x17979 (sal_main + 0x59) 0x4ff76a04: 0x000576ec: /usr/lib/openoffice.org2.0/program/libsoffice.so + 0x17a04 (main + 0x44) 0x4cc12f2c: 0x00138d9c: /lib/libc.so.6 + 0x15f2c (__libc_start_main + 0xdc) 0x080484a1: 0x00000618: /usr/lib/openoffice.org2.0/program/scalc.bin + 0x4a1 ...end stackreport details ... ...start sample ldd details ... linux-gate.so.1 => (0x00217000) libuno_sal.so.3 => /usr/lib/openoffice.org2.0/program/libuno_sal.so.3 (0x00615000) libuno_salhelpergcc3.so.3 => /usr/lib/openoffice.org2.0/program/libuno_salhelpergcc3.so.3 (0x0080b000) libstore.so.3 => /usr/lib/openoffice.org2.0/program/libstore.so.3 (0x001e0000) libdl.so.2 => /lib/libdl.so.2 (0x00110000) libpthread.so.0 => /lib/libpthread.so.0 (0x00fd9000) libstlport_gcc.so => /usr/lib/openoffice.org2.0/program/libstlport_gcc.so (0x00bc5000) libstdc++.so.6 => /usr/lib/libstdc++.so.6 (0x009a2000) libm.so.6 => /lib/libm.so.6 (0x00114000) libgcc_s.so.1 => /lib/libgcc_s.so.1 (0x00b14000) libc.so.6 => /lib/libc.so.6 (0x00218000) libcrypt.so.1 => /lib/libcrypt.so.1 (0x0013b000) /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0x80000000) ...end sample ldd details ...
@allanp: whom did you want to assign this issue?
allanp, please specify steps that cause crash. Also try version 2.2 or soon to be released 2.2.1.
Hi Allan, what did you do to get this stack? Sorry, but the report is simply invalid without any further informations. Peter
got some insight here, reopening
dup of 84676 *** This issue has been marked as a duplicate of 84676 ***
close as dup