[Bug 2216359] New: [abrt] ibus-hangul: hangul_ic_select_keyboard():
ibus-engine-hangul killed by SIGSEGV
by bugzilla@redhat.com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2216359
Bug ID: 2216359
Summary: [abrt] ibus-hangul: hangul_ic_select_keyboard():
ibus-engine-hangul killed by SIGSEGV
Product: Fedora
Version: 38
Hardware: x86_64
Status: NEW
Whiteboard: abrt_hash:3eafadb17611ffba936bc47e510215df525ef714;VAR
IANT_ID=workstation;
Component: ibus-hangul
Assignee: pwu(a)redhat.com
Reporter: nemo1275(a)gmail.com
QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
CC: i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, pwu(a)redhat.com,
shawn.p.huang(a)gmail.com, tfujiwar(a)redhat.com
Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora
Version-Release number of selected component:
ibus-hangul-1.5.4-15.fc38
Additional info:
reporter: libreport-2.17.10
type: CCpp
reason: ibus-engine-hangul killed by SIGSEGV
journald_cursor:
s=6d2bb5532c154ba78d37592881f5db50;i=2d0f3;b=64537836924c4521bdcdde0dbe20a263;m=10a0a658df;t=5fe9903886d5e;x=607cbe118c7ca7b1
executable: /usr/libexec/ibus-engine-hangul
cmdline: /usr/libexec/ibus-engine-hangul --ibus
cgroup:
0::/user.slice/user-1000.slice/user@1000.service/session.slice/org.freedesktop.IBus.session.GNOME.service
rootdir: /
uid: 1000
kernel: 6.3.7-200.fc38.x86_64
package: ibus-hangul-1.5.4-15.fc38
runlevel: N 5
backtrace_rating: 4
crash_function: hangul_ic_select_keyboard
Truncated backtrace:
Thread no. 1 (11 frames)
#0 hangul_ic_select_keyboard at
/usr/src/debug/libhangul-0.1.0-27.fc38.x86_64/hangul/hangulinputcontext.c:1628
#1 settings_changed at
/usr/src/debug/ibus-hangul-1.5.4-15.fc38.x86_64/src/engine.c:1945
#3 signal_emit_unlocked_R.isra.0 at ../gobject/gsignal.c:3812
#6 g_settings_real_change_event at ../gio/gsettings.c:392
#7 _g_cclosure_marshal_BOOLEAN__POINTER_INTv at ../gio/gmarshal-internal.c:428
#8 _g_closure_invoke_va at ../gobject/gclosure.c:895
#11 settings_backend_path_changed at ../gio/gsettings.c:467
#13 g_settings_backend_invoke_closure at ../gio/gsettingsbackend.c:275
#17 g_main_context_iterate.isra.0 at ../glib/gmain.c:4276
#19 ibus_main at /usr/src/debug/ibus-1.5.28-6.fc38.x86_64/src/ibusshare.c:330
#20 start_component at
/usr/src/debug/ibus-hangul-1.5.4-15.fc38.x86_64/src/main.c:116
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2216359
Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-...
1 month, 3 weeks
[Bug 2093080] New: Default fonts for Arabic do not match the font
packages list
by bugzilla@redhat.com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2093080
Bug ID: 2093080
Summary: Default fonts for Arabic do not match the font
packages list
Product: Fedora
Version: 36
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
Status: NEW
Component: fontconfig
Severity: medium
Assignee: tagoh(a)redhat.com
Reporter: awilliam(a)redhat.com
QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
CC: ajax(a)redhat.com, caillon+fedoraproject(a)gmail.com,
fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org,
gnome-sig(a)lists.fedoraproject.org,
i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, mclasen(a)redhat.com,
pnemade(a)redhat.com, rhughes(a)redhat.com,
rstrode(a)redhat.com, sandmann(a)redhat.com,
tagoh(a)redhat.com
Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora
There's a test case:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_i18n_default_fonts
which requires checking the default fonts for various languages against a list,
http://tagoh.fedorapeople.org/fonts/fc-test.sh .
The current default fonts for Arabic installs do not match the list. The list
states sans should be DejaVu Sans, serif should be FreeSerif or MPH 2B Damase,
and mono should be DejaVu Sans Mono. These may have been changed recently, as
our openQA reference text file expects them to be Noto Naskh Arabic (for both
sans and serif?) and PakType Naskh Basic for mono.
In any case, what we actually see doesn't match either the list or the openQA
reference file. We see "Noto Sans Arabic" and "PakType Naqsh" in the output
from the test, I think for serif (yes really) and monospace respectively.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2093080
1 month, 3 weeks
[Bug 2235282] New: [abrt] ibus: bus_server_init(): ibus-daemon
killed by SIGTRAP
by bugzilla@redhat.com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2235282
Bug ID: 2235282
Summary: [abrt] ibus: bus_server_init(): ibus-daemon killed by
SIGTRAP
Product: Fedora
Version: 39
Hardware: ppc64le
Status: NEW
Whiteboard: abrt_hash:e70f4ca101def3ac6f2be9e0173bd33fef6ba0ee;VAR
IANT_ID=workstation;
Component: ibus
Assignee: tfujiwar(a)redhat.com
Reporter: 8(a)tle.id.au
QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
CC: i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org,
shawn.p.huang(a)gmail.com, tfujiwar(a)redhat.com
Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora
Description of problem:
# System Details Report
---
## Report details
- **Date generated:** 2023-08-28 19:15:02
## Hardware Information:
- **Hardware Model:** (null)
- **Memory:** 61.4 GiB
- **Processor:** POWER9, altivec supported ×
32
- **Graphics:** Software Rendering
- **Disk Capacity:** 1.0 TB
## Software Information:
- **Firmware Version:** (null)
- **OS Name:** Fedora Linux 39 (Workstation
Edition Prerelease)
- **OS Build:** (null)
- **OS Type:** 64-bit
- **GNOME Version:** 45.beta.1
- **Windowing System:** X11
- **Kernel Version:** Linux
6.5.0-0.rc7.20230821gitf7757129e3de.50.fc39.ppc64le
## Steps to re-produce
1/ Install from Live USB
2/ Get passed the gnome-initial-setup screen
3/ Once gnome-shell kicks in, I see the Error report tooling warning me
ibus-daemon failed to start
Version-Release number of selected component:
ibus-1.5.29~beta2-3.fc39
Additional info:
reporter: libreport-2.17.11
type: CCpp
reason: ibus-daemon killed by SIGTRAP
journald_cursor:
s=fe1ca329d82f4e58a21358dfbe314ed2;i=c97;b=406433e3dc0a43948f9f086eace7bdbd;m=15342f8;t=603f7ed16f3fd;x=4bb5c18eda945e31
executable: /usr/bin/ibus-daemon
cmdline: ibus-daemon --panel disable --xim
cgroup: 0::/user.slice/user-980.slice/session-c1.scope
rootdir: /
uid: 980
kernel: 6.5.0-0.rc7.20230821gitf7757129e3de.50.fc39.ppc64le
package: ibus-1.5.29~beta2-3.fc39
runlevel: N 5
backtrace_rating: 4
crash_function: bus_server_init
Truncated backtrace:
Thread no. 1 (1 frames)
#8 bus_server_init at server.c:295
Potential duplicate: bug 1785276
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2235282
Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-...
2 months
[Bug 2217542] New: cppcheck-2.11-1.fc39 fails on gettext.h with
returnDanglingLifetime
by bugzilla@redhat.com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2217542
Bug ID: 2217542
Summary: cppcheck-2.11-1.fc39 fails on gettext.h with
returnDanglingLifetime
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Hardware: x86_64
URL: https://github.com/rhinstaller/anaconda/actions/runs/5
378586167/jobs/9758588667#step:4:2099
OS: Linux
Status: NEW
Component: gettext
Severity: medium
Assignee: petersen(a)redhat.com
Reporter: jkonecny(a)redhat.com
QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
CC: dueno(a)redhat.com, i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org,
nphilipp(a)redhat.com, petersen(a)redhat.com,
suanand(a)redhat.com
Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora
On Rawhide cppcheck was recently updated and now we are getting
returnDanglingLifetime error from it on copied gettext.h file from
/usr/share/gettext/gettext.h path.
Version of cppcheck which shows this issue: 2.11-1.fc39
Last version of cppcheck which worked well: 2.9-4.fc38
I don't know if the error is valid or not...
Reproducible: Always
Steps to Reproduce:
1. podman run --rm -it fedora:rawhide
2. dnf install -y cppcheck gettext-devel
3. cppcheck -q -v /usr/share/gettext/gettext.h
Actual Results:
/usr/share/gettext/gettext.h:248:16: error: Returning pointer to local variable
'msg_ctxt_id' that will be invalid when returning. [returnDanglingLifetime]
return translation;
Expected Results:
No error
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2217542
Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-...
2 months
[Bug 2265259] New: google-noto-sans-phags-pa-fonts fails to upgrade
from F39 -> F40
by bugzilla@redhat.com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2265259
Bug ID: 2265259
Summary: google-noto-sans-phags-pa-fonts fails to upgrade from
F39 -> F40
Product: Fedora
Version: 40
OS: Linux
Status: NEW
Component: google-noto-fonts
Severity: high
Assignee: tagoh(a)redhat.com
Reporter: msuchy(a)redhat.com
QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org,
i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org,
petersen(a)redhat.com, pwu(a)redhat.com, tagoh(a)redhat.com
Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora
During upgrade from F39 to F40 I get this error:
Problém 3: package google-noto-sans-phags-pa-fonts-20230801-4.fc39.noarch from
@System requires google-noto-fonts-common = 20230801-4.fc39, but none of the
providers can be installed
- google-noto-fonts-common-20230801-4.fc39.noarch from @System does not
belong to a distupgrade repository
- problém s nainstalovaným balíčkem
google-noto-sans-phags-pa-fonts-20230801-4.fc39.noarch
Problém 4: package network-scripts-ppp-2.5.0-3.fc39.x86_64 from @System
requires network-scripts, but none of the providers can be installed
This is because the subpackage google-noto-sans-phags-pa-fonts in F39 that is
named differently in F40 google-noto-sans-phagspa-fonts. Mind the difference
between phagspa vs. phags-pa.
This blocks upgrades for users from F39.
Here is policy regarding renaming packages
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#renaming-or-re...
Reproducible: Always
Steps to Reproduce:
1. sudo dnf --releasever=40 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f40 \
--enablerepo=updates-testing \
$(rpm -q fedora-repos-modular >/dev/null && echo
--enablerepo=updates-testing-modular) \
--assumeno distro-sync
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2265259
Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-...
2 months, 2 weeks