Bug 186232 - kio_trash goes up to 100% cpu usage when deleting a url link off the desktop
Summary: kio_trash goes up to 100% cpu usage when deleting a url link off the desktop
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 179348
Alias: None
Product: kio
Classification: Frameworks and Libraries
Component: trash (show other bugs)
Version: unspecified
Platform: Ubuntu Unspecified
: NOR normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: David Faure
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2009-03-05 16:47 UTC by Andrea
Modified: 2009-03-15 13:54 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:
Latest Commit:
Version Fixed In:

Attachments
Add an attachment

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Andrea 2009-03-05 16:47:29 UTC 
Version:           kio_trash (using KDE 4.2.0)
Installed from:    Ubuntu Packages

hi there
i linked to a couple of pages on my desktop and today i wanted to delete them (three links to be precise). CPU usage shot up to 100%, and after 5 min still nothing was deleted. (I killed kio_trash which was at 100% cpu usage and used the konsole to get rid of the links). 

This is reproducible on my machine, i created a link afterwards to kde.org and tried deleting that as well. again, 100% cpu, 0 success. 

Please tell me what you need as I am well aware of the fact that this is not a complete bug report (I don't have a backtrace or anything like that).

Thank you for getting back to me and have a nice day!

ANDREA

ps: kio_trash is not on the application list nor does a search yield anything. I thus put it into plasma in the hopes that someone will reassign it. sorry for the extra work...
Comment 1 Andrea 2009-03-05 16:50:04 UTC 
btw: deleting them as in "moving to the trash" causes this problem, while deleting them as in "kill it forever" works fine.
Comment 2 Dario Andres 2009-03-07 23:29:58 UTC 
This may be related to bug 179348
Comment 3 Bram Schoenmakers 2009-03-09 00:38:14 UTC 
I would say this is a dupe of bug 179348.
Comment 4 Dario Andres 2009-03-15 13:54:31 UTC 

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 179348 ***