Version: KSysGuard 1.2.0 (using KDE KDE 3.4.0) Installed from: Debian stable Packages OS: Linux Hello I am John Barkas. In knoppix 3.9 I have found a bug in the KSystemGuard (KSysGuard) 1.2.0 .IT IS BY FAR ONE OF THE MOST STUPID MISTAKE I HAVE EVER COME TO!!!JUST BEFORE IT IS STARTED,THE NUMERIC VARIABLES FOR THE PROCESSES,MEMORY,SWAP &... ARE EMPTY.WHILE THEY ARE EMPTY I TOOK A PICTURE AND SEE WHAT IT DISPLAYS TO THE SCREEN 88888 888888 ...8888888.WHO ON EARTH PROGRAMMED IT THAT WAY.IF THIS WAS DISPLAYED ON AN LCD CLOCK SCREEN FOR EXAMPLE I WOULD SAY ALRIGHT BUT WHY DOES IT HAVE TO DISPLAY ANYTHING AT ALL????I SEND YOU snapshotA knoppix 3.9-KDE3.4-KSysGuard 1.2.0.png FOR THIS REASON TO UNDERSTAND THE ERROR BETTER. I BELIEVE YOU SHOULD REMOVE THAT CODE AND LEAVE IT EMPTY UNTIL THE VARIABLES TAKE THEIR NUMBERS THERE.WHEN THEY TAKE THEM,YOU CAN DISPLAY THEM.I DID NOT CHECK FOR THIS ERROR THE PROCESSES TABLE TAB,ALSO TEST IT.
Created attachment 11592 [details] The picture of the error Please see it to solve it.
Please refrain from shouting (use of capital letters). I believe the 88888 are intentional.
Hi FF! can you report a real bug report with a bit more care?
I have same bug in my notebook but not in my desktop PC! I try to start on notebook ksysguardd manualy, but it's crash: $ ksysguardd ksysguardd 1.2.0 (c) 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002 Chris Schlaeger <cs@kde.org> and (c) 2001 Tobias Koenig <tokoe@kde.org> This program is part of the KDE Project and licensed under the GNU GPL version 2. See http://www.kde.org for details. Segmentation fault Last few lines of strace ksysguardd: open("/proc/11569/status", O_RDONLY|O_LARGEFILE) = 4 fstat64(4, {st_mode=S_IFREG|0444, st_size=0, ...}) = 0 mmap2(NULL, 4096, PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE, MAP_PRIVATE|MAP_ANONYMOUS, -1, 0) = 0xb7e4a000 read(4, "Name:\tstrace\nState:\tR (running)\n"..., 1024) = 567 read(4, "", 1024) = 0 read(4, "", 1024) = 0 close(4) = 0 munmap(0xb7e4a000, 4096) = 0 open("/proc/11569/stat", O_RDONLY|O_LARGEFILE) = 4 fstat64(4, {st_mode=S_IFREG|0444, st_size=0, ...}) = 0 mmap2(NULL, 4096, PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE, MAP_PRIVATE|MAP_ANONYMOUS, -1, 0) = 0xb7e4a000 read(4, "11569 (strace) R 11553 11569 115"..., 1024) = 197 close(4) = 0 munmap(0xb7e4a000, 4096) = 0 gettimeofday({1120378695, 2751}, NULL) = 0 open("/proc/11569/cmdline", O_RDONLY|O_LARGEFILE) = 4 fstat64(4, {st_mode=S_IFREG|0444, st_size=0, ...}) = 0 mmap2(NULL, 4096, PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE, MAP_PRIVATE|MAP_ANONYMOUS, -1, 0) = 0xb7e4a000 read(4, "strace\0ksysguardd\0", 1024) = 18 read(4, "", 1024) = 0 close(4) = 0 munmap(0xb7e4a000, 4096) = 0 time(NULL) = 1120378695 gettimeofday({1120378695, 3965}, NULL) = 0 open("/proc/11570/status", O_RDONLY|O_LARGEFILE) = 4 fstat64(4, {st_mode=S_IFREG|0444, st_size=0, ...}) = 0 mmap2(NULL, 4096, PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE, MAP_PRIVATE|MAP_ANONYMOUS, -1, 0) = 0xb7e4a000 read(4, "Name:\tksysguardd\nState:\tR (runni"..., 1024) = 574 read(4, "", 1024) = 0 read(4, "", 1024) = 0 close(4) = 0 munmap(0xb7e4a000, 4096) = 0 open("/proc/11570/stat", O_RDONLY|O_LARGEFILE) = 4 fstat64(4, {st_mode=S_IFREG|0444, st_size=0, ...}) = 0 mmap2(NULL, 4096, PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE, MAP_PRIVATE|MAP_ANONYMOUS, -1, 0) = 0xb7e4a000 read(4, "11570 (ksysguardd) R 11569 11569"..., 1024) = 190 close(4) = 0 munmap(0xb7e4a000, 4096) = 0 gettimeofday({1120378695, 6163}, NULL) = 0 open("/proc/11570/cmdline", O_RDONLY|O_LARGEFILE) = 4 fstat64(4, {st_mode=S_IFREG|0444, st_size=0, ...}) = 0 mmap2(NULL, 4096, PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE, MAP_PRIVATE|MAP_ANONYMOUS, -1, 0) = 0xb7e4a000 read(4, "ksysguardd\0", 1024) = 11 read(4, "", 1024) = 0 close(4) = 0 munmap(0xb7e4a000, 4096) = 0 time(NULL) = 1120378695 getdents64(3, /* 0 entries */, 1024) = 0 close(3) = 0 open("/proc/meminfo", O_RDONLY|O_LARGEFILE) = 3 read(3, "MemTotal: 248700 kB\nMemFre"..., 2047) = 670 close(3) = 0 open("/proc/stat", O_RDONLY|O_LARGEFILE) = 3 read(3, "cpu 79894 56 14885 745157 57213"..., 32767) = 694 gettimeofday({1120378695, 8462}, NULL) = 0 close(3) = 0 open("/proc/vmstat", O_RDONLY|O_LARGEFILE) = 3 read(3, "nr_dirty 656\nnr_writeback 0\nnr_u"..., 32767) = 687 close(3) = 0 open("/proc/diskstats", O_RDONLY|O_LARGEFILE) = 3 read(3, " 3 0 hda 82872 36484 299057"..., 32767) = 242 close(3) = 0 gettimeofday({1120378695, 9596}, NULL) = 0 gettimeofday({1120378695, 9721}, NULL) = 0 gettimeofday({1120378695, 9845}, NULL) = 0 gettimeofday({1120378695, 9967}, NULL) = 0 gettimeofday({1120378695, 10167}, NULL) = 0 gettimeofday({1120378695, 10290}, NULL) = 0 gettimeofday({1120378695, 10413}, NULL) = 0 gettimeofday({1120378695, 10537}, NULL) = 0 gettimeofday({1120378695, 10668}, NULL) = 0 gettimeofday({1120378695, 10792}, NULL) = 0 gettimeofday({1120378695, 10915}, NULL) = 0 gettimeofday({1120378695, 11038}, NULL) = 0 gettimeofday({1120378695, 11171}, NULL) = 0 gettimeofday({1120378695, 11294}, NULL) = 0 gettimeofday({1120378695, 11417}, NULL) = 0 gettimeofday({1120378695, 11541}, NULL) = 0 gettimeofday({1120378695, 11666}, NULL) = 0 gettimeofday({1120378695, 11789}, NULL) = 0 gettimeofday({1120378695, 11912}, NULL) = 0 gettimeofday({1120378695, 12034}, NULL) = 0 gettimeofday({1120378695, 12167}, NULL) = 0 gettimeofday({1120378695, 12291}, NULL) = 0 gettimeofday({1120378695, 12413}, NULL) = 0 gettimeofday({1120378695, 12537}, NULL) = 0 open("/proc/net/dev", O_RDONLY|O_LARGEFILE) = 3 read(3, "Inter-| Receive "..., 4095) = 938 gettimeofday({1120378695, 13274}, NULL) = 0 close(3) = 0 open("/proc/net/tcp", O_RDONLY|O_LARGEFILE) = 3 close(3) = 0 open("/proc/net/udp", O_RDONLY|O_LARGEFILE) = 3 close(3) = 0 open("/proc/net/unix", O_RDONLY|O_LARGEFILE) = 3 close(3) = 0 open("/proc/net/raw", O_RDONLY|O_LARGEFILE) = 3 close(3) = 0 open("/proc/apm", O_RDONLY|O_LARGEFILE) = -1 ENOENT (No such file or directory) open("/proc/acpi/battery", O_RDONLY|O_NONBLOCK|O_LARGEFILE|O_DIRECTORY) = 3 fstat64(3, {st_mode=S_IFDIR|0555, st_size=0, ...}) = 0 fcntl64(3, F_SETFD, FD_CLOEXEC) = 0 getdents64(3, /* 4 entries */, 1024) = 96 --- SIGSEGV (Segmentation fault) @ 0 (0) --- +++ killed by SIGSEGV +++ ByCzech
First of all the bug is at DEBIAN UNSTABLE. I reported the bug and on my surprise I read what that stupid guy(Stephan Kulow) has reported.Maybe he was in a bad mood but that is not an excuse!DO NOT BARK UP THE WRONG TREE.It was a mistake to open the bug and try to help KDE to become better on the first place....I am "sorry" for the "false" bug I reported which "lost" my time.Next time I need a DE I shall NOT CHOOSE KDE.I have submitted real bugs too, you can see 105894 for example you moron which was fixed in the next KDE version.YOU ARE NOT FOR SURE THE ONLY MAN ON THE UNIVERSE HELPING KDE.ALSO KDE IS NOT THE ONLY DE ON THE WORLD AS GNOME EXISTS AND IT WAS OPEN SOURCE FROM THE BEGINNING....!!!It is sure that with such a behaviour I shall not provide any feedback on KDE big or small UNLESS I GET AN APOLOGY FROM THIS GUY.Continue with such a behaviour and you shall end up running ONLY in AIX,SOLARIS and UNIXWARE(or even windows as that will not surprise me at all) as a relic of the past together with motif.You should know that I want to use a nearly flawless open source DE THAT DOES NOT EVEN HAVE THE SMALLEST TYPO ERROR.In order for my DE choise to achieve this I SHALL HELP BY REPORTING EVERYTHING THAT LOOKS WRONG.IF YOU TRANSLATE THIS INTO LACK OF FINDING OR REPORTING "REAL" BUGS THEN YOU ARE NOT EVEN CLOSE..If I wanted to use something that just works I could use windows and even dos but that is not the case for now as I will swith to GNOME! You must understand who is your friend and who is your foe amongst people. Unless you explain with source why this is a "false" bug then you leave me with the impression that you are a ten year old children. HERE I WANT TO PERSONALLY THANK THE GUYS THAT CONSIDERED THE BUG AS "REAL" AND PROVIDED ANY FEEDBACK THEY COULD!IF YOU STILL THINK IT IS A "FALSE" WHILE NOT EXPLAINING,I SHALL SEE THE ERROR IN 3.4.2 AND IF IT IS REPEATED I WILL GO TO FEDORA-GNOME. HAVE A NICE DAY.
Coolo does not have to apologise for anything. First of all, he's right: you're not reporting a bug at all. The 88888 are intentional, so therefore it can't be a bug. You can think it's annoying, but that doesn't make it a bug. Second, you were very impolite in your report in the first place. And you are now even more impolite, so no, you will not get anything. That doesn't mean we don't want to receive more bug reports from you: we just want you to do it nicely. It's small things like not shouting or calling it a "stupid bug" that makes us disregard bug reports like this. Please consider that.
I agree with you 90% but I do not think that it would be so difficult to clearly say for example that KDE developers have a big workload right now but they would fix it in the future instead of writing report a real bug.Had he wrote that,I would totally understood him!