[vorbis-dev] CVS vorbis, fatal cc1

[Nicolas Pitre]

On Sat, 26 Oct 2002, Michael Smith wrote:

> At 10:04 PM 25/10/2002 -0400, you wrote:
> >On Fri, 25 Oct 2002, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> >
> >> > Signal 11 in gcc are signs of bad hardware, especially memory, most of the
> >> > time.  You might want to run memtest86 on your PC to be sure.
> >> 
> >> I wish people would unlearn this "sig11 == hardware problem" as fast and
> >> thoroughly as they learned it.  With any somewhat-recent gcc, a sig11
> >> (and especially repeatable ones!) are almost always a gcc bug.
> >
> >Segher, please re-read what the guy wrote.
> >
> >One day it crashes.  The next day it works.
> >
> 
> Nicolas, please re-read what the guy wrote.
> 
> One day it crashes, repeatedly, in a well-known place with a set of options
> and a version of gcc that are KNOWN to always cause a crash due to a specific
> gcc bug. The next day, it does not crash, with those options changed to
> avoid the bug.

You're most certainly right about that well known gcc bug I wasn't aware of.

However here what has been written:

|Weird. Just... weird. I made sure to take out the i686 stuff and it
|worked. Everything did NOT work yesterday, incl. libshout. My
|machine literally fixed itself overnight. Eerie.
|
|Works now, even though I thought I took it out yesterday, too.
            ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Now, experience has shown many times in the past that bad memory could be
the cause for those gcc segfaults, too.  Sorry if this wasn't the case here.

<p>Nicolas

--- >8 ----
List archives:  http://www.xiph.org/archives/
Ogg project homepage: http://www.xiph.org/ogg/
To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to 'vorbis-dev-request at xiph.org'
containing only the word 'unsubscribe' in the body.  No subject is needed.
Unsubscribe messages sent to the list will be ignored/filtered.