Crash on search.yahoo.com
Christof Meerwald
reproducibly crashes for me - using Ubuntu 10.04 (AMD64).
Christof
--
http://cmeerw.org sip:cmeerw at cmeerw.org
mailto:cmeerw at cmeerw.org xmpp:cmeerw at cmeerw.org
David W. Hodgins
> When trying to open http://search.yahoo.com Opera 10.54, Build 6333
> reproducibly crashes for me - using Ubuntu 10.04 (AMD64).
No problem here. Same build, using Mandriva 2010.0 i586.
Regards, Dave Hodgins
--
Change nomail.afraid.org to ody.ca to reply by email.
(nomail.afraid.org has been set up specifically for
use in usenet. Feel free to use it yourself.)
Jan van Gent
http://nos.nl/nieuws/live/journaal24/wmv/
or www.uitzendinggemist.nl
New Ubuntu 64 Lucid plugins aren't recognized by Opera: neither totem, vlc or xine.
Can anyone confirm / does somebody has a solution?
In 10.10 and 10.5x
Totem plugin worked in Opera and Ubuntu 9.10
Jan
--
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
Christof Meerwald
> On Mon, 10 May 2010 02:57:52 -0400, Christof Meerwald <NOSPAM-see...@usenet.cmeerw.org> wrote:
>> When trying to open http://search.yahoo.com Opera 10.54, Build 6333
>> reproducibly crashes for me - using Ubuntu 10.04 (AMD64).
> No problem here. Same build, using Mandriva 2010.0 i586.
Interesting - it's completely reproducible here (maybe it's only affecting
64-bit builds...). BTW, the famous last words/syscalls from an strace
attached to the opera process:
[pid 3369] connect(30, {sa_family=AF_INET, sin_port=htons(80),
sin_addr=inet_addr("72.30.186.249")}, 16) = -1 EALREADY (Operation already
in progress)
[pid 3369] select(31, [3 21 28 29], [], [3 21 28 29 30], {0, 0}) = 0
(Timeout)
[pid 3369] read(3, 0x2abf274, 4096) = -1 EAGAIN (Resource temporarily
unavailable)
[pid 3369] mmap(NULL, 32768, PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE|PROT_EXEC,
MAP_PRIVATE|MAP_ANONYMOUS, -1, 0) = 0x7f7f638e1000
[pid 3369] mmap(NULL, 32768, PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE|PROT_EXEC,
MAP_PRIVATE|MAP_ANONYMOUS, -1, 0) = 0x7f7f638bb000
[pid 3369] --- SIGSEGV (Segmentation fault) @ 0 (0) ---
[pid 3369] --- SIGSEGV (Segmentation fault) @ 0 (0) ---
Process 3369 detached
[pid 3376] +++ killed by SIGSEGV +++
[pid 3373] +++ killed by SIGSEGV +++
One other thing to note is that I don't even get the crash reporting thing
in this case.
David W. Hodgins
> [pid 3369] --- SIGSEGV (Segmentation fault) @ 0 (0) ---
> [pid 3369] --- SIGSEGV (Segmentation fault) @ 0 (0) ---
> Process 3369 detached
> [pid 3376] +++ killed by SIGSEGV +++
> [pid 3373] +++ killed by SIGSEGV +++
> One other thing to note is that I don't even get the crash reporting thing
> in this case.
I'd open a bug report, zip the strace output, and send it as an
attachment to the bug report address.
Jan van Gent
http://nos.nl/nieuws/live/journaal24/wmv/
or www.uitzendinggemist.nl
New Ubuntu 64 Lucid plugins aren't recognized by Opera: neither totem, vlc or xine.
Can anyone confirm / does somebody has a solution?
In 10.10 and 10.5x
Totem plugin worked in Opera and Ubuntu 9.10, so I guess it's an ubuntu issue.
Jan
Victor Schneider, Ph. D.
Have you tried running Ubuntu 32-bit with the plugins? Or, in fact, are you using 32-bit plugins? My sorta slackware 32-bit system works fine with the xine plugin (hint to developers: ruin this, working fine not allowed at all).
(This is coming from WinVN running on Wine in the same system.)
(If you do performance benchmarking, I'll bet you see no improvement at all with 64-bit software and/or systems.)
Jan van Gent
Hi Victor,
> Have you tried running Ubuntu 32-bit with the plugins? Or, in fact, are you using 32-bit plugins? My sorta slackware 32-bit system works fine with the xine plugin (hint to developers: ruin this, working fine not allowed at all).
Not with Lucid. totem worked in 9.10 64 bit though. I use the standard installed plugins, which work with Firefox.
> (This is coming from WinVN running on Wine in the same system.)
>
> (If you do performance benchmarking, I'll bet you see no improvement at all with 64-bit software and/or systems.)
>
Dunno, my system has 6GB, IMHO that's to much for 32 bits OS.
richard lucassen
"Jan van Gent" <janvan{away}ge...@zonnet.nl> wrote:
> > (If you do performance benchmarking, I'll bet you see no
> > improvement at all with 64-bit software and/or systems.)
> >
>
> Dunno, my system has 6GB, IMHO that's to much for 32 bits OS.
$ uname -a
Linux obelix 2.6.32-3-amd64 #1 SMP Wed Feb 24 18:07:42 UTC 2010 x86_64
GNU/Linux
x86_64 means it's a 64bit, otherwise it will show i686 or i386:
$ uname -a
Linux hoefnix 2.6.31.11 #1 SMP Wed Jan 13 14:48:26 CET 2010 i686
GNU/Linux
R.
--
___________________________________________________________________
It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak
aloud and remove all doubt.
+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Richard Lucassen, Utrecht |
| Public key and email address: |
| http://www.lucassen.org/mail-pubkey.html |
+------------------------------------------------------------------+
Jan van Gent
>
> $ uname -a
> Linux obelix 2.6.32-3-amd64 #1 SMP Wed Feb 24 18:07:42 UTC 2010 x86_64
> GNU/Linux
>
> x86_64 means it's a 64bit, otherwise it will show i686 or i386:
>
> $ uname -a
> Linux hoefnix 2.6.31.11 #1 SMP Wed Jan 13 14:48:26 CET 2010 i686
> GNU/Linux
>
Linux asterix 2.6.32-22-generic #33-Ubuntu SMP Wed Apr 28 13:28:05 UTC 2010 x86_64 GNU/Linux
Totem Browser Plugin 2.30.1 not recognized. Works in Firefox and worked in Ubuntu 9.01 and Opera 10.10
http://nos.nl/nieuws/live/journaal24/wmv/
Christof Meerwald
> When trying to open http://search.yahoo.com Opera 10.54, Build 6333
> reproducibly crashes for me - using Ubuntu 10.04 (AMD64).
Is it just me or is Opera getting increasingly unstable?
10.60 build 6344 now even crashes when trying to load http://twitter.com
The interesting thing is that I haven't seen any crashes with earlier 10.50
alpha builds (until 10.52 or 10.53) at all, but the latest builds are now
getting almost unusable... :-(
Christof Meerwald
> 10.60 build 6344 now even crashes when trying to load http://twitter.com
Some more details:
*** glibc detected *** /usr/lib/opera/opera: munmap_chunk(): invalid
pointer: 0x0000000002253b20 ***
...
opera [crash logging]: CRASH!!
/usr/lib/opera/opera got signal SIGABRT at address 7EFFC151BA75
This is on Ubuntu 10.04 AMD64
Christof Meerwald
> On Tue, 01 Jun 2010 16:14:42 -0300, Christof Meerwald
><NOSPAM-see...@usenet.cmeerw.org> wrote:
>> 10.60 build 6344 now even crashes when trying to load http://twitter.com
> with those. :-) Incidentaslly, I've not had any problems with it on Win
> XP-Pro.
Sure, but the 10.54 beta wasn't much better either and the stable version
for Linux (10.10) is hopelessly outdated (and surely has known security
vulnerabilities by now, so can't be recommended either).
The sad truth is that there currently is no Opera version for Linux that can
be recommended at the moment.
David W. Hodgins
> 10.60 build 6344 now even crashes when trying to load http://twitter.com
Confirmed. Site works ok if you turn off javascript.
Ken Knox
<NOSPAM-see...@usenet.cmeerw.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 10 May 2010 06:57:52 +0000 (UTC), Christof Meerwald wrote:
>> When trying to open http://search.yahoo.com Opera 10.54, Build 6333
>> reproducibly crashes for me - using Ubuntu 10.04 (AMD64).
>
> Is it just me or is Opera getting increasingly unstable?
>
> 10.60 build 6344 now even crashes when trying to load http://twitter.com
>
> The interesting thing is that I haven't seen any crashes with earlier
> 10.50
> alpha builds (until 10.52 or 10.53) at all, but the latest builds are now
> getting almost unusable... :-(
>
>
> Christof
>
Opera 10.60 is an *alpha* version...you have to expect some unstabilities
with those. :-) Incidentaslly, I've not had any problems with it on Win
XP-Pro.
--
Ken Knox
Opera 10.10.1893
Jorgen Grahn
> On Tue, 01 Jun 2010 15:42:18 -0300, Ken Knox wrote:
>> On Tue, 01 Jun 2010 16:14:42 -0300, Christof Meerwald
>><NOSPAM-see...@usenet.cmeerw.org> wrote:
>>> 10.60 build 6344 now even crashes when trying to load http://twitter.com
>> Opera 10.60 is an *alpha* version...you have to expect some unstabilities
>> with those. :-) Incidentaslly, I've not had any problems with it on Win
>> XP-Pro.
>
> Sure, but the 10.54 beta wasn't much better either and the stable version
> for Linux (10.10) is hopelessly outdated
How?
> (and surely has known security
> vulnerabilities by now, so can't be recommended either).
Exactly what are those vulnerabilities? I expect Opera to come with
security updates for the most recent stable release, like any normal
company (or free software developer).
> The sad truth is that there currently is no Opera version for Linux that can
> be recommended at the moment.
Unless there are known and serious vulnerabilities, I gladly recommend
the stable one, just like Opera themselves do.
/Jorgen
--
// Jorgen Grahn <grahn@ Oo o. . .
\X/ snipabacken.se> O o .
Christof Meerwald
> On Tue, 2010-06-01, Christof Meerwald wrote:
>> Sure, but the 10.54 beta wasn't much better either and the stable version
>> for Linux (10.10) is hopelessly outdated
>> vulnerabilities by now, so can't be recommended either).
> Exactly what are those vulnerabilities? I expect Opera to come with
> security updates for the most recent stable release, like any normal
> company (or free software developer).
There are CVE-2010-1728, CVE-2010-1310 and CVE-2010-1349 for Opera 10.5x,
but it's not immediately obvious if 10.10 on Linux is affected by these.
As there is no statement from Opera that version 10.10 on Linux is not
affected, I don't have very high confidence.
Jorgen Grahn
> On 2 Jun 2010 07:03:11 GMT, Jorgen Grahn wrote:
>> On Tue, 2010-06-01, Christof Meerwald wrote:
>>> Sure, but the 10.54 beta wasn't much better either and the stable version
>>> for Linux (10.10) is hopelessly outdated
>>> (and surely has known security
>>> vulnerabilities by now, so can't be recommended either).
>> Exactly what are those vulnerabilities? I expect Opera to come with
>> security updates for the most recent stable release, like any normal
>> company (or free software developer).
>
> There are CVE-2010-1728, CVE-2010-1310 and CVE-2010-1349 for Opera 10.5x,
Thanks! As you probably suspected, I thought you couldn't back that up.
Here they are as URLs:
http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2010-1728
http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2010-1310
http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2010-1349
> but it's not immediately obvious if 10.10 on Linux is affected by these.
> As there is no statement from Opera that version 10.10 on Linux is not
> affected, I don't have very high confidence.
At least CVE-2010-1349 claims 10.10 is affected, and CVE-2010-1728
says "Opera before 10.53 ..." :-(
Arjan van Leeuwen
<grahn...@snipabacken.se>:
That bug is specific to Opera for Windows.
> and CVE-2010-1728 says "Opera before 10.53 ..." :-(
But that doesn't mean 10.10 here. Although 10.50, 10.51 and 10.52 are
affected, 10.10 is not, because the security issue was found in the new
javascript engine that is found in Opera 10.5x. Opera 10.10 does not have
the code that causes this issue.
Arjan
--
Gemaakt met Opera's revolutionaire e-mailprogramma:
http://www.opera.com/mail/
Christof Meerwald
> reproducibly crashes for me - using Ubuntu 10.04 (AMD64).
The final 10.60 build still crashes on search.yahoo.com on my machine
using Ubuntu 10.04 (AMD64). BTW, if anyone is wondering, I did report
this as DSK-298526.
richard lucassen
Christof Meerwald <NOSPAM-see...@usenet.cmeerw.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 10 May 2010 06:57:52 +0000 (UTC), Christof Meerwald wrote:
> > When trying to open http://search.yahoo.com Opera 10.54, Build 6333
> > reproducibly crashes for me - using Ubuntu 10.04 (AMD64).
>
> The final 10.60 build still crashes on search.yahoo.com on my machine
> using Ubuntu 10.04 (AMD64). BTW, if anyone is wondering, I did report
> this as DSK-298526.
Confirm same problem here. Debian testing, amd64.
Version 10.60 Internal
Build 6386
Platform Linux
System x86_64, 2.6.32-5-amd64