From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Sep 22 07:25:50 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBEB716A4B3 for ; Mon, 22 Sep 2003 07:25:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from alogis.com (firewall.solit-ag.de [212.184.102.1]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 431E943FA3 for ; Mon, 22 Sep 2003 07:25:49 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from Holger.Kipp@alogis.com) Received: from intserv.int1.b.intern (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by alogis.com (8.11.1/8.9.3) with SMTP id h8MEPWY68417; Mon, 22 Sep 2003 16:25:32 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from hk@alogis.com) Message-Id: <200309221425.h8MEPWY68417@alogis.com> Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 14:25:27 +0000 From: Holger Kipp To: jsmith@drexel.edu, freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailer: phpGroupWare (http://www.phpgroupware.org) MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Disposition: inline Content-description: Mail message body Subject: Re: Gcc 3.2.2 vs gcc 3.2.3 X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: Holger.Kipp@alogis.com List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 14:25:50 -0000 Justin Smith (jsmith@drexel.edu) wrote: >I'm running a P4 2.4 Ghz processor with 512meg of ram. > >I've had the problem of getting signal 11 and signal 4 when I make >buildworld and buildkernel. > >I tested my system with memtest86 (for several hours) and it says >everything is OK. We had similar problems once. It turned out to be a 'lucky' combination of good mainboard and good memory that were slightly incompatible. memtest86 might not detect this, but make buildworld will. If you don't get the errors at the same location every time, it might be the same issue. We found out after contacting both the mainboard and the memory chip vendors. imho memtest seems to be suitable for this-is-real-broken-memory(tm) only. It might be that due to differnent optimisations (gcc 3.2.2 vs gcc 3.2.3) you might escape the bitpatterns that would otherwise trigger the sig 11. This is only one possibility, but might be worth looking at. Regards, Holger Kipp (Sysadmin alogis AG, Berlin)