Bug 247550 - Digikam does not quit gracefully
Summary: Digikam does not quit gracefully
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: digikam
Classification: Applications
Component: Database-Engine (show other bugs)
Version: 1.3.0
Platform: Ubuntu Linux
: NOR normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Digikam Developers
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2010-08-12 19:29 UTC by tnemeth
Modified: 2019-12-25 10:15 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
Latest Commit:
Version Fixed In: 7.0.0
Sentry Crash Report:


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description tnemeth 2010-08-12 19:29:11 UTC
Version:           1.3.0 (using KDE 4.5.0) 
OS:                Linux

Digikam keeps running after beeing closed in a infinite loop waiting for some event.

$ ps aux | grep digikam
...
thomas   16157  2.2  8.5 950500 175980 ?       Sl   19:13   0:07 /usr/bin/digikam -caption digiKam -icon digikam
...

With :
       S    Interruptible sleep (waiting for an event to complete)
       l    is multi-threaded (using CLONE_THREAD, like NPTL pthreads do)


Reproducible: Always

Steps to Reproduce:
Launch digikam, look at some photographs, quit it and have a look at the
process table.

Actual Results:  
thomas   16157  2.2  8.5 950500 175980 ?       Sl   19:13   0:07 /usr/bin/digikam -caption digiKam -icon digikam


Expected Results:  
Nothing should appear.

I don't know if it's a wanted feature, but it keeps the action "Download Photos With Digikam" from properly beeing executed.

I discovered that when trying to download my photographs and it didn't worked. I
then had a look at the action menu to know how digikam was launched: that gave me the idea to have a look at the process table. There was 3 instance of digikam
running. When I killed the 3 instances with SIGTERM (does digikam handle this signal ?) I could use the action menu normally.

But still the new instance was still running after I quit the application.
Comment 1 Johannes Wienke 2010-08-12 20:15:57 UTC
Can you have a look if this is a duplicate of bug 247175 by doing the same gdb steps?
Comment 2 tnemeth 2010-08-13 18:02:05 UTC
(In reply to comment #1)
> Can you have a look if this is a duplicate of bug 247175 by doing the same gdb
> steps?

    I don't have the version with debugging symbols so I'm not able to
    show you the stack, but by the given description, it seems to be
    indeed a duplicate...

    Sorry I didn't find it before.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 247175 ***
Comment 3 caulier.gilles 2019-12-25 10:15:53 UTC
Not reproducible using digiKam 7.0.0 beta1.