Bug 234314 - crash in kdebase-runtime-4.4.1-1.fc12: Process /usr/bin/nepomukservicestub was killed by signal 11
Summary: crash in kdebase-runtime-4.4.1-1.fc12: Process /usr/bin/nepomukservicestub wa...
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: nepomuk
Classification: Miscellaneous
Component: general (show other bugs)
Version: unspecified
Platform: Fedora RPMs Linux
: NOR crash
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Sebastian Trueg
URL:
Keywords:
: 232564 (view as bug list)
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2010-04-14 09:11 UTC by Christoph Wickert
Modified: 2010-04-29 21:58 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
Latest Commit:
Version Fixed In:

Attachments
backtrace of the crash (21.28 KB, text/plain)
2010-04-14 09:12 UTC, Christoph Wickert 		Details
View All Add an attachment

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Christoph Wickert 2010-04-14 09:11:34 UTC 
Version:            (using KDE 4.4.1)
Compiler:          gcc-4.4.3-4.fc12.x86_64 
OS:                Linux
Installed from:    Fedora RPMs

Forwarded from https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=582110


abrt 1.0.8 detected a crash.

architecture: x86_64
Attached file: backtrace
cmdline: /usr/bin/nepomukservicestub nepomukstorage
comment: A crash appeared when I started kontact.
component: kdebase-runtime
executable: /usr/bin/nepomukservicestub
kernel: 2.6.32.11-99.fc12.x86_64
package: kdebase-runtime-4.4.1-1.fc12
rating: 4
reason: Process /usr/bin/nepomukservicestub was killed by signal 11 (SIGSEGV)
release: Fedora release 12 (Constantine)

How to reproduce
-----
1. Start kontact
2. ABRT reports a crash, nevertheless Kontact works as usual
Comment 1 Christoph Wickert 2010-04-14 09:12:38 UTC 
Created attachment 42772 [details]
backtrace of the crash
Comment 2 Sebastian Trueg 2010-04-15 15:24:13 UTC 
This bug has already been fixed in 4.4.2.
Comment 3 Christoph Wickert 2010-04-19 17:56:18 UTC 
*** Bug 232564 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 4 Christoph Wickert 2010-04-29 21:58:57 UTC 
Sorry, I don't think so, look at bug 232564 and 235757.