begin quote On Sat, 3 Jan 2004 21:46:45 -0500 Robert G. Waycott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Spider, I > don't follow your suggestion to 'check the RAM fex.' What's 'fex.'? "fex", short for "for example" in this case, sig11 is a common error on compilations for systems where there are hardware failures. i wanted to rule out that you're one more of those who got an athlon for christmas and overclocked it at once, only to have it fail in strange ways when doing large and demanding compiles. > Regarding xfree and Mozilla, I do not have Mozilla on my system. I use > Opera for the most part. But xfree is running the latest updated > version. It failed to compile once, but upon retrying, I succesfully > built it. hmm, that sounds good, since if it can do xfree (another demanding task) it should be able to do glibc/gcc.. > However, now I cannot succesfully emerge such packages as glibc, gcc, > kdelibs, and other nefarious behemoths. The only addition to my > system that was absent from the 2.4.23 incarnation > is bootsplash and framebuffer. Would these be in the background > gobbling up memory or other resources, effecting compilations? Thank > you for reading. Send me to Siberia now. The problem here is that with large things breaking, I'm led to suspect hardware. If you want to rule that out, there are known-good binary copies of gcc + glibc in the archive over at http://chinstrap.alternating.net , if you dare grab one from there (i686 compile) those "should" work. built on stable x86 , no fuzz or weirdness... However, thats about all I can suggest, the fact that it fails under heavy load, and not always at the same place, suggests that its a memory issue though :/ //Spider -- begin .signature This is a .signature virus! Please copy me into your .signature! See Microsoft KB Article Q265230 for more information. end
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
