Note: This is a public test instance of Red Hat Bugzilla. The data contained within is a snapshot of the live data so any changes you make will not be reflected in the production Bugzilla. Email is disabled so feel free to test any aspect of the site that you want. File any problems you find or give feedback at bugzilla.redhat.com.

Bug 536941

Summary: [abrt] crash detected in gtkpod-0.99.14-3.fc12
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Chitlesh GOORAH <chitlesh>
Component: gtkpodAssignee: Todd Zullinger <tmz>
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: low    
Version: 12CC: tmz
Target Milestone: ---Keywords: Triaged
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: i686   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard: abrt_hash:03f7983f159e04532582524021835224bfa9ec05
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2009-12-02 13:40:07 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Attachments:
Description Flags
File: backtrace none

Description Chitlesh GOORAH 2009-11-11 20:58:00 UTC 
abrt detected a crash.

Comment: This crash occured when launching gtkpod with the ipod nano connected via usb.
Attached file: backtrace
cmdline: gtkpod
component: gtkpod
executable: /usr/bin/gtkpod
kernel: 2.6.31.5-127.fc12.i686
package: gtkpod-0.99.14-3.fc12
rating: 3
reason: Process was terminated by signal 6
Comment 1 Chitlesh GOORAH 2009-11-11 20:58:03 UTC 
Created attachment 369104 [details]
File: backtrace
Comment 2 Todd Zullinger 2009-11-11 21:13:08 UTC 
This looks a lot like what Paul reported in bug #532484 the other day.  The abrt output isn't identical, but it's pretty similar at a glance.
Comment 3 Chitlesh GOORAH 2009-11-11 21:16:36 UTC 
I'll be offline till saturday. But don't hesitate to ask me test X Y Z if needed. I'll respond to you during the weekend.
Comment 4 Chitlesh GOORAH 2009-12-02 13:40:07 UTC 
Yes indeed it is the same bug.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 532484 ***