search

zhangqd / chromiumembedded

Automatically exported from code.google.com/p/chromiumembedded
0 stars 1 forks source link

CEF Helper process showing unresponsive on Mac 10.9.1 #1242

Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
What steps will reproduce the problem?
1. Install "CEF 3.1650.1639" build available from cefbuilds.com
2. Launch Sample CEF Client Application
3. Watch Activity monitor

What is the expected output? What do you see instead?
Expected is to see all CEF Helper processes in normal state.
But one of the CEF Helper processes showup in unresponsive state after some 
time.

What version of the product are you using? On what operating system?
We are using CEF 3.1650.1639 on Mac 10.9.1

Please provide any additional information below.
We are integrating CEF framework in our product and are facing the same 
unresponsive state problem for our helper process. We checked it with the 
sample app and found it coming with that as well.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by sourabh....@gmail.com on 3 Apr 2014 at 6:50

Attachments:

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
Can you test if the problem occurs with the 1750 branch?

Related forum post: http://www.magpcss.org/ceforum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=11499

Original comment by magreenb...@gmail.com on 4 Apr 2014 at 2:24

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
Yes, this occurs with 3.1750.1638 build as well.

Original comment by sourabh....@gmail.com on 4 Apr 2014 at 3:23

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
This issue appears to be resolved with the update to Chromium revision 261035 / 
CEF revision 1641 (tested with OS X 10.9.2). A new build should be available on 
http://cefbuilds.com in a few days. Please report back if you're still having 
this issue with that build.

Original comment by magreenb...@gmail.com on 4 Apr 2014 at 4:51

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
I don't see any more builds in 3.1650 branch apart from 1639. Is this going to 
be fixed in 3.1650 branch ?

Original comment by sourabh....@gmail.com on 9 Jun 2014 at 11:58

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
@comment#4: No, it will not be fixed in the 1650 branch.

Original comment by magreenb...@gmail.com on 9 Jun 2014 at 3:29