Created attachment 65298 [details] output from "gdb soffice.bin" Just downloaded and installed LO 3.6 release on RHEL 6.3. When trying to run it from desktop launcher, nothing seems to happen. From command line, I get "segmentation fault". 3.5.5 was uninstalled before installing 3.6. 3.5.5 worked fine. Tried with a fresh user profile (renamed "libreoffice/3/user" directory to "user-35") and did get a new "user" directory created, but same segfault. gdb /opt/libreoffice36/program/soffice.bin actually shows the splash screen, but then freezes. GDB output is attached. For reference, "yum list libreoffice*" shows: libreoffice3.6.x86_64 3.6.0.4-104 @/libreoffice3.6-3.6.0.4-104.x86_64 libreoffice3.6-base.x86_64 3.6.0.4-104 @/libreoffice3.6-base-3.6.0.4-104.x86_64 libreoffice3.6-calc.x86_64 3.6.0.4-104 @/libreoffice3.6-calc-3.6.0.4-104.x86_64 libreoffice3.6-dict-en.x86_64 3.6.0.4-104 @/libreoffice3.6-dict-en-3.6.0.4-104.x86_64 libreoffice3.6-dict-es.x86_64 3.6.0.4-104 @/libreoffice3.6-dict-es-3.6.0.4-104.x86_64 libreoffice3.6-dict-fr.x86_64 3.6.0.4-104 @/libreoffice3.6-dict-fr-3.6.0.4-104.x86_64 libreoffice3.6-draw.x86_64 3.6.0.4-104 @/libreoffice3.6-draw-3.6.0.4-104.x86_64 libreoffice3.6-en-US.x86_64 3.6.0.4-104 @/libreoffice3.6-en-US-3.6.0.4-104.x86_64 libreoffice3.6-freedesktop-menus.noarch 3.6.0-104 @/libreoffice3.6-freedesktop-menus-3.6.0-104.noarch libreoffice3.6-impress.x86_64 3.6.0.4-104 @/libreoffice3.6-impress-3.6.0.4-104.x86_64 libreoffice3.6-math.x86_64 3.6.0.4-104 @/libreoffice3.6-math-3.6.0.4-104.x86_64 libreoffice3.6-stdlibs.x86_64 3.6.0.4-104 @/libreoffice3.6-stdlibs-3.6.0.4-104.x86_64 libreoffice3.6-ure.x86_64 3.6.0.4-104 @/libreoffice3.6-ure-3.6.0.4-104.x86_64 libreoffice3.6-writer.x86_64 3.6.0.4-104 @/libreoffice3.6-writer-3.6.0.4-104.x86_64 And my system: [pkidwell@oc3243065148 Desktop]$ uname -a Linux oc3243065148 2.6.32-279.el6.x86_64 #1 SMP Wed Jun 20 01:32:12 EDT 2012 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
@caolan, rings a bell maybe? some font files out there known to cause trouble?
Did you install any specific font ? Could you take a look to http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/BugReport#How_to_get_backtrace_.28on_Linux.29 to retrieve an useful backtrace (I mean with symbols) ?
There have been quite a few fonts in the past which tripped us up. a strace would be sufficient to find the last font file opened which would let us know which one it is, so... can I get the output of strace -f /opt/libreoffice3.6/program/soffice.bin > /tmp/strace.log 2>&1
Created attachment 65496 [details] strace output
Created attachment 65497 [details] full backtrace (no debug symbols) Note that there are 2 runs in this trace - first one without the "bad" font, second one with. Of course, first one ran fine.
OK - I didn't realize that when I add an attachment, Bugzilla doesn't save comments I typed first. The "culprit" font is Aquabase-spanish-support.ttf, and when I removed that one, LO 3.6 ran fine. That's a good-enough workaround for me right now, so I'm happy. That said, I've attached the strace (which identifies the problem font) as well as the full backtrace, for those who are intensely curious. Note that the backtrace was created without debugging symbols installed; as this is working for me now, I won't be installing those, but hopefully it will help anyway! Thanks for all the support!
There was also this: https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=107552
The return of the killer Aquabase-spanish-support in a new location
Caolan McNamara committed a patch related to this issue. It has been pushed to "master": http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/commit/?id=90496967fe7ddb8a616dce8c70013fa4450c5983 Resolves: fdo#53258 Aquabase-spanish-support busts ttf reader again
Caolan McNamara committed a patch related to this issue. It has been pushed to "libreoffice-3-6": http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/commit/?id=16be10d016c8ecb2e5df21466510bc0e9e2e3a27&g=libreoffice-3-6 Resolves: fdo#53258 Aquabase-spanish-support busts ttf reader again It will be available in LibreOffice 3.6.2.
*** Bug 53366 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 53831 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***