Re: [Evolution] Evolution segfault
On Tue, 2022-11-15 at 00:49 +0100, Andre Klapper via evolution-list
wrote:
> On Mon, 2022-11-14 at 15:08 -0600, Tim McConnell via evolution-list
> wrote:
> > I'm getting this:
>
> There is no Evolution code call in there.
> Feel free to file a bug report in gitlab.gnome.org with a full
> backtrace ("thread apply all bt full" in gdb).
>
> Thanks,
> andre
Thanks Andre, I'll try it when it breaks again.
--
Tim McConnell
___
evolution-list mailing list
evolution-list@gnome.org
To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ...
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] Evolution segfault
On Mon, 2022-11-14 at 15:08 -0600, Tim McConnell via evolution-list
wrote:
> I'm getting this:
There is no Evolution code call in there.
Feel free to file a bug report in gitlab.gnome.org with a full
backtrace ("thread apply all bt full" in gdb).
Thanks,
andre
--
Andre Klapper | ak...@gmx.net
https://blogs.gnome.org/aklapper/
___
evolution-list mailing list
evolution-list@gnome.org
To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ...
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] Have I pushed Evolution beyond where it is designed to go?
On 11/14/22 12:08, Paul Smith wrote: On Mon, 2022-11-14 at 09:19 -0600, Anonymous Japhering via evolution- list wrote: The 3.46.x flatpak series has been a total disaster for me. Mysterious segfaults after 15 or so actions. This is (probably) due to the bug in libsoup, which has been fixed but that fix has not made it to the releases yet. https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/libsoup/-/issues/308 Connection failures right and left. I manage 8 email addresses. 4 Google workspace address, 2 Google free gmail address and 2 MS office online addresses. All 8 use Oauth2 to authenticate via IMAP. At the moment, 3 of google address won't authenticate ( 2 paid, 1 free) and 1 of the MS accounts also fails. Hm. I have 1 IMAP, 2 GMail (1 company 1 private), and 1 Exchange and all work properly for me. When it works Flatpak is a nice tool, a much better alternative than trying build Evolution from scratch or running the distro version which is on 3.36.5 I just want to make clear that the above issues are not due to _flatpak_ as a technology (at least there's no proof of that). They are due to issues in Evolution 3.46 (or libraries it uses like libsoup). Never said it was a Flatpak issue, just an issue that has been eating my lunch since 3.46.x went live. IOW, if you had Evolution 3.46 installed natively on your system, not via flatpak, you'd almost certainly see the same issues. Flatpak won't, unfortunately, fix bugs in software it packages :). Unfortunately, Ubuntu/Linux Mint trail Evolution by so much as to make the distro install worthless to me, as I seem to be abusing Evolution around the edges. I left the distro provided version because of missing functionality and bugs that impacted me, moving to the more current Flatpak version. Not to mention I don't have time nor disk space to build from scratch. The nice thing about flatpak is it's quite simple to install an older version (e.g., Evolution 3.44) if that's helpful to you. If you're seeing crashes that often you may well want to downgrade until the libsoup issue is resolved in a flatpak. Tried that once, was as nice as you imply as Evolution requires other flatpaks to work properly. So you end up in a dependency hell trying to get all the bits to the appropriate levels. I find it easier just keep an instance of Thunderbird configured for when Evolution flakes out. ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] Evolution segfault
On Mon, 2022-11-14 at 16:16 -0500, Paul Smith wrote: > On Mon, 2022-11-14 at 15:08 -0600, Tim McConnell via evolution-list > wrote: > > I'm on Evolution version 3.46.1-1 & Libsoup version 3.74.3- > > 1(testing). > > I don't think there's any such thing as libsoup 3.74.3. The most > recent libsoup released is 3.2.2. > > Did you mean *2*.74.3? Well, sort of? I'm showing libsoup-gnome2.4-1 with that version and libsoup3.0-0 with a version number of 3.2.1-2. I know I have the version that is supposed to fix the libsoup error. I'm on Debian Bookworm(testing) and I get the distro updates. -- Tim McConnell ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
[Evolution] Evolution segfault
Hi List, I'm getting this: (evolution:19042): GLib-GObject-CRITICAL **: 14:53:27.457: g_object_ref: assertion 'G_IS_OBJECT (object)' failed [Thread 0x7fff3aff76c0 (LWP 1800033) exited] [Thread 0x7fff37ff16c0 (LWP 1800030) exited] [Thread 0x7fff3c7fa6c0 (LWP 1800044) exited] [Thread 0x7fff377f06c0 (LWP 1800051) exited] [Thread 0x7fff3b7f86c0 (LWP 1800046) exited] [Thread 0x7fff3cffb6c0 (LWP 1800043) exited] [Thread 0x7fff543fc6c0 (LWP 1800034) exited] [Thread 0x7fff387f26c0 (LWP 1800050) exited] Thread 1 "evolution" received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault. 0x7708b547 in g_mutex_lock (mutex=mutex@entry=0x8) at ../../../glib/gthread-posix.c:1529 1529../../../glib/gthread-posix.c: No such file or directory. (gdb) (gdb) bt #0 0x7708b547 in g_mutex_lock (mutex=mutex@entry=0x8) at ../../../glib/gthread-posix.c:1529 #1 0x7257152b in soup_connection_manager_cleanup (manager=0x0, cleanup_idle=cleanup_idle@entry=0) at ../libsoup/soup-connection-manager.c:516 #2 0x725819ed in async_run_queue (session=session@entry=0x7fffc82f5e20) at ../libsoup/soup- session.c:1822 #3 0x72581ad9 in queue_dispatch (source=, callback=, user_data=) at ../libsoup/soup-session.c:184 #4 0x770377a9 in g_main_dispatch (context=0x555f39f0) at ../../../glib/gmain.c:3444 #5 g_main_context_dispatch (context=context@entry=0x555f39f0) at ../../../glib/gmain.c:4162 #6 0x77037a38 in g_main_context_iterate (context=0x555f39f0, block=block@entry=1, dispatch=dispatch@entry=1, self=) at ../../../glib/gmain.c:4238 #7 0x77037cef in g_main_loop_run (loop=0x55afd2c0) at ../../../glib/gmain.c:4438 #8 0x7764a265 in gtk_main () at /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libgtk- 3.so.0 #9 0x8f8a in main () I'm on Evolution version 3.46.1-1 & Libsoup version 3.74.3-1(testing). -- Tim McConnell ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] Have I pushed Evolution beyond where it is designed to go?
On Mon, 2022-11-14 at 20:09 +0100, Ralf Mardorf via evolution-list wrote: > it was pointed out several times that Evolution downgrades are > sometimes a problem regarding the user data/settings. Downgrades of > any software can suffer from this issues. Of course. I didn't mean to suggest that somehow flatpak would handle this; it's not magic. However, since the OP is using IMAP, GMail, and Exchange none of which store any critical data locally, you don't need to try to downgrade the user settings. You can downgrade the software then recreate the accounts and not have lost anything (I've done similar things a number of times over the years). > Flatpaks and similar approaches make some things easier for users, > but other things harder and they even don't solve all existing > problems related to upgrades and downgrades. I'm not sure what you had in mind when you say "other things harder", but to me "make some things easier" can be worthwhile even IF it doesn't "solve all existing problems". Luckily I'm not waiting for something that solves all existing problems, or I'd never use anything. Look, to be clear, if I have the choice between installing Evolution natively from my distro versus the same version of Evolution in a flatpak, I'll certainly choose the native distro version. That's not what we're talking about. We're talking about either a 2+-year-old version of Evolution from my distro that doesn't do what I need, versus a much newer version of Evolution in a flatpak, versus trying to build and install it myself. I've been down that road before. I'm saying that flatpak is a perfectly reasonable technology and I've seen no real, practical problems with it that would prevent me from using it, or from recommending that others who need it use it as well. I HAVE seen a lot of people quite het up about it, but none of the reasons given (when reasons are given) seem that important to me. ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] Have I pushed Evolution beyond where it is designed to go?
On Mon, 2022-11-14 at 13:08 -0500, Paul Smith wrote: > The nice thing about flatpak is it's quite simple to install an older > version (e.g., Evolution 3.44) if that's helpful to you. Hi, it was pointed out several times that Evolution downgrades are sometimes a problem regarding the user data/settings. Downgrades of any software can suffer from this issues. Sometimes user data/settings are transformed by an update to a different format and can become incompatible for usage with older versions. IOW unless it's not verified that the user data/settings are backwards compatible or a backup of compatible formatted user data is available, it doesn't matter how easy or hard the downgrade of the software itself is. I don't know if data/settings used with 3.46 do work without issues when using 3.44. Much likely there's no issue with emails and if needed settings can be reset to defaults by the gsettings command. Likely the worst case is to redo the settings. Resume, downgrading this kind of containerized software is easier to do for bloated software, than for the same software with a huge shared dependency tree, but the container approach doesn't solve user data/settings backwards incompatibility. Flatpaks and similar approaches make some things easier for users, but other things harder and they even don't solve all existing problems related to upgrades and downgrades. Regards, Ralf ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] Have I pushed Evolution beyond where it is designed to go?
On Mon, 2022-11-14 at 09:19 -0600, Anonymous Japhering via evolution- list wrote: > The 3.46.x flatpak series has been a total disaster for me. > Mysterious segfaults after 15 or so actions. This is (probably) due to the bug in libsoup, which has been fixed but that fix has not made it to the releases yet. https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/libsoup/-/issues/308 > Connection failures right and left. I manage 8 email addresses. 4 > Google workspace address, 2 Google free gmail address and 2 MS office > online addresses. All 8 use Oauth2 to authenticate via IMAP. At > the moment, 3 of google address won't authenticate ( 2 paid, 1 free) > and 1 of the MS accounts also fails. Hm. I have 1 IMAP, 2 GMail (1 company 1 private), and 1 Exchange and all work properly for me. > When it works Flatpak is a nice tool, a much better alternative than > trying build Evolution from scratch or running the distro version > which is on 3.36.5 I just want to make clear that the above issues are not due to _flatpak_ as a technology (at least there's no proof of that). They are due to issues in Evolution 3.46 (or libraries it uses like libsoup). IOW, if you had Evolution 3.46 installed natively on your system, not via flatpak, you'd almost certainly see the same issues. Flatpak won't, unfortunately, fix bugs in software it packages :). The nice thing about flatpak is it's quite simple to install an older version (e.g., Evolution 3.44) if that's helpful to you. If you're seeing crashes that often you may well want to downgrade until the libsoup issue is resolved in a flatpak. ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] Have I pushed Evolution beyond where it is designed to go?
On 11/8/22 00:21, Paul Smith wrote: On Mon, 2022-11-07 at 16:17 -0600, Tim McConnell via evolution-list wrote: On Mon, 2022-11-07 at 16:34 -0500, Paul Smith wrote: I'm not sure I understand this comment. The whole point of flatpak (and snap) is that it's not _supposed_ to need to worry about the dependencies of the distribution. That's why you'd use it. Which is why they are bad ideas to use. There is no way that ARCH or Gentoo or Kali use the same dependencies. It's called "Dependency Hell" and the theory of FlatPack and SNAP not needing to follow or use a distributions is like walking into a [...] As mentioned I'm using Ubuntu 20.04 which has a similar vintage of Gnome desktop and apps, including Evolution, that the Debian stable in question uses. And the flatpak version of Evolution 3.46 works great on my system. The 3.46.x flatpak series has been a total disaster for me. Mysterious segfaults after 15 or so actions. Connection failures right and left. I manage 8 email addresses. 4 Google workspace address, 2 Google free gmail address and 2 MS office online addresses. All 8 use Oauth2 to authenticate via IMAP. At the moment, 3 of google address won't authenticate ( 2 paid, 1 free) and 1 of the MS accounts also fails. Every Flatpak component is fully updated, leaving me running 3.46.1 at the moment. When it works Flatpak is a nice tool, a much better alternative than trying build Evolution from scratch or running the distro version which is on 3.36.5 ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
