On 02/27/17 07:56, Carsten Grzemba wrote: > My thunderbird 45.6.0 on hipster writes core files, but the stack is not > clear for me: > > fef01035 __pollsys (8046b20, 1, 0, 0, fe69fb90, 8046c20) + 15 > fee92f36 poll (8046b20, 1, ffffffff, feef51b6) + 66 > f915a705 _xcb_conn_wait (fe665000, 8046be0, 0, 0) + 95 > f915c740 wait_for_reply (1075d, 0, 8046ca4, f9596000, fe656000, fe656000) + > f0 > f915cac5 xcb_wait_for_reply64 (fe665000, 1075d, 0, 8046ca4, fe66500c, > 8046ca4) > + 55 > f94a3f3f _XReply (fe656000, 8046d00, 0, 1, fe656000, 1) + 1af > f21a1737 XScreenSaverQueryInfo (fe656000, 100, e43f8160, fc7daf42, f1ecdb8c, > 0) > + 87 > fc7daf4a ???????? (81000009, 11945c3, 3cec8300, 8b08758b, ac83, fc08500) > ace85356 ???????? () > > Why is TB interested in my screensaver?
That call (XScreenSaverQueryInfo) will tell you whether the screen is currently being displayed and how long until it will go to the saver (if displayed) or how long it's been in screen-saver mode (if not displayed). My guess would be that they're using this information to determine whether or not to scan for new email. Why bother pulling data via POP or IMAP if the screen isn't being displayed at all? Especially since most users leave their email client up all the time. > What is so terrible on my screensaver that TB cores? That's probably the right question. But I don't see a reason for a core dump here. Are you sure that's the thread that faulted? -- James Carlson 42.703N 71.076W <carls...@workingcode.com> _______________________________________________ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
