From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 08:56:36 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 08:56:27 -0400 Received: from femail34.sdc1.sfba.home.com ([24.254.60.24]:45564 "EHLO femail34.sdc1.sfba.home.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 08:56:12 -0400 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII From: Nicholas Knight Reply-To: tegeran@home.com To: "Samium Gromoff" <_deepfire@mail.ru>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: strange gcc crashes... Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2001 05:56:06 -0700 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.2] In-Reply-To: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <01081305560700.00343@c779218-a> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Monday 13 August 2001 04:55 am, Samium Gromoff wrote: > at Aug 11, 01 06:51:15 PM +0000 Mark Hahn wrote: > >> so it seems to me like kernel problem... > > > >why is that? I've never seen a sig11 from production >code > >that wasn't caused by flakey ram. in fact, your >descriptions > >are a perfect example of similar hardware problems. > > and some other people told me about cpu overheating... > > but 55 minutes long memtest run showed no problems et al > with cpu (P166-nonMMX-oc`ed to 180) staying warm, not by any means hot > on mobo Zida 5DVX. > > maybe 55 min is not enough for proper mem testing? Synthetic tests are never as good as a real good gcc run, I'd *never* trust them over the indications given by attempting to compile the kernel or something big like XFree86.