[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#390702: openoffice.org: more details



Package: openoffice.org
Version: 2.0.4~rc2-2
Followup-For: Bug #390702

I've debugged this a bit more. This issue seems to be related with i18n.
I've managed to get oowriter launched after purging my .openoffice.org but
when I open a document (in spanish) OOo crashes again with the same backtrace.

Removing the l10n-es package also seemed to "fix" the issue, but when opening 
a documment in spanish OOo crashed again. Backtrace for that is the very same:

Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
[Switching to Thread -1245300512 (LWP 19536)]
0xb113573e in component_getFactory () from /usr/lib/openoffice/program/i18npool.uno.so
(gdb) backtrace
#0  0xb113573e in component_getFactory () from /usr/lib/openoffice/program/i18npool.uno.so
#1  0x08c674f0 in ?? ()
#2  0x00000062 in ?? ()
#3  0x00000003 in ?? ()
#4  0x00000000 in ?? ()

I think we should consider upgrading this to critical.

-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (500, 'unstable')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Shell:  /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash
Kernel: Linux 2.6.18-1-k7
Locale: LANG=es_PE.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=es_PE.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)

Versions of packages openoffice.org depends on:
ii  openoffice.org-base          2.0.4~rc2-2 OpenOffice.org office suite - data
ii  openoffice.org-calc          2.0.4~rc2-2 OpenOffice.org office suite - spre
ii  openoffice.org-core          2.0.4~rc2-2 OpenOffice.org office suite archit
ii  openoffice.org-draw          2.0.4~rc2-2 OpenOffice.org office suite - draw
ii  openoffice.org-impress       2.0.4~rc2-2 OpenOffice.org office suite - pres
ii  openoffice.org-java-common   2.0.4~rc2-2 OpenOffice.org office suite Java s
ii  openoffice.org-math          2.0.4~rc2-2 OpenOffice.org office suite - equa
ii  openoffice.org-writer        2.0.4~rc2-2 OpenOffice.org office suite - word

openoffice.org recommends no packages.

-- no debconf information



Reply to: