[CentOS] C6 Firefox 45.1 segmentation faults

Mon May 2 21:43:12 UTC 2016
Bill Maltby (C4B) <centos4bill at gmail.com>

On Mon, 2016-05-02 at 14:06 -0500, Johnny Hughes wrote:
> On 05/02/2016 01:46 PM, Bill Maltby (C4B) wrote:
> <snip>

> >> Anyone else experiencing unstable behaviour of FF 45.1 on C6?
> > 
> > Day it was out I got the same. Since I already had some difficulties
> > with RH6/C6 upgrades changing the way things worked (or didn't, such as
> > telinit), I just did a yum downgrade FF and and kept using my tools as
> > tools.
> > 
> Well, that update is critical for security, so I would try to help find
> the issues (we can feed back to RH and help them fix) .. rather than
> using something with critical security issues to browse the web.

I would like to, but since CentOS got integrated with RH I got the
feeling that a non-CentOS problem didn't get help here?

With the upgrade to ... 6.6 I, and others, reported problems with X vs.
run-level changes causing issues.

Starting here

Dec 7 2014 bug report: https://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=7972

Nothing happened even though I took the time to post a bug and collect
pertinent data and things discovered into a pastebin file with links for

So I made a guess that sans a RH subscription I had no way to pursue a
non-CentOS issue.

N.B. I'm operating based on a (faulty?) memory that prior to absorption
into RH we used to post bugs on CentOS and someone at CentOS would
examine, do whatever else, maybe request more info, and then put a bug
(or requesst the reporter to do so?) on RH if appropriate and post
tracking # to the list.

That did not happen in this case even though the defect was obviously
upstream, some potential causes were identified, based on what I had
enough knowledge to investigate, and so I just adapted myself to what I
thought the new environment was by not expending time & effort that
would lead nowhere.

This was reasonable for me since I had "worked around" the conflict
between where X starts up by default and the assumed available VTs in
the new-fangled start-up stuff.

In the past I had tried to use the crash reporting thingy that Gnome
provides, but I never had a clue where/how to send that stuff.

As far as the security concerns, I'm a careful user and seldom "click
through" on things I don't recognize in e-mails or browsers. That's
given me decent results for over a decade now.

I have it easier than many of you folks since I don't admin anything but
my own self-built & configured LAN behind an IPCop box and have only a
few users: me, myself and I. And my wife & relatives might use my WAP to
get to the net on the IPhones & such.

> Some things that can help here:
> 1.  A site where you always get a crash.

That would be tough - when I open FF it's on five desktops with multiple
tabs open to myltiple sites in each instance.

I can say this though. It acted the same on two CentOS-6.7 fully updated
(identically) boxes (different hardware) that open (mostly) different
sets of tabs. But in both cases there's some similarity in that sites
with javascript and on which server-provided java applications (my boxes
are fully updated with the latest "official" java plugins) are activated
early (Investorshub, part of the Advfn financial services network).

ISTR that's where the crash happened in each case as I RealVNC into the
secondary box to ran the java app in the browser and display results on
my primary unit.

> 2.  If you also have access to RHEL-6, test the firefox from RHEL-6 on
> the same site to verify if this is a RHEL or CentOS issue.

Don't have RH subscription or installation.

> Thanks,
> Johnny Hughes
> <snip>

Thanks for responding,