From owner-freebsd-questions Wed Mar 6 14:48:16 1996 Return-Path: owner-questions Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id OAA05334 for questions-outgoing; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 14:48:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.Clark.Net (mail.clark.net [168.143.0.10]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id OAA05326 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 14:48:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from dboynton.clark.net (dboynton.clark.net [168.143.4.165]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with SMTP id RAA07920 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 17:48:04 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199603062248.RAA07920@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Wed, 06 Mar 96 17:41:38 -0500 From: Dave Boynton X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22 (Windows; I; 16bit) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: questions@freebsd.org Subject: FAQ erroneous Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-questions@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk Answer 7.5 of the FAQ seems to suggest that the most common cause of signal 11 errors is faulty memory. Anyone who knows unix, knows that segmentation violations are caused by dereferencing an invalid pointer, by accessing beyond the end of your process' allocated memory, or possibly by writing over your stack and returning to an invalid address. To suggest to possibly novice users that all of their signal 11 errors are due to faulty memory is a disservice to the FreeBSD community, and may prevent users from sending otherwise valid bug reports in which involve segmentation violations. Perhaps that's why I'm experiencing a bug involving signal 11 with both version 2.05-RELEASE and 2.1-RELEASE on two different machines and the same program - no one sent in a bug report because they thought it was their memory! Dave Boynton dboynton@clark.net