Jeff Epler wrote:
> Well, a copy of that document *is* the first hit for a google search on
> 'linux signal 11 faq'
> http://www.google.com/search?q=linux+signal+11+faq
>
> In other words, someone who does the slightest bit of research will
> find the answer.
Perhaps, but if a new user s
On Mon, Nov 20, 2000 at 08:33:25PM +0100, Frank van Maarseveen wrote:
> [...]
> > [root@merrimac linux-2.2.17]# cd scripts
> > [root@merrimac scripts]# gcc -o mkdep.o mkdep.c
> > collect2: ld terminated with signal 11 [Segmentation fault], core dumped
> > [root@merrimac scripts]# gcc -c -o mkdep.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
David Riley wrote:
> Richard Torkar wrote:
> >
> > Well David, there is such a "manual".
> >
> > http://ftp.sunet.se/LDP/FAQ/faqs/GCC-SIG11-FAQ
>
> Yes. And if you ask the average new Linux user if they've read it, I
> doubt you'll get a "yes". My
On Tue, Nov 21, 2000 at 06:17:48PM -0500, David Riley wrote:
> Richard Torkar wrote:
> >
> > Well David, there is such a "manual".
> >
> > http://ftp.sunet.se/LDP/FAQ/faqs/GCC-SIG11-FAQ
>
> Yes. And if you ask the average new Linux user if they've read it, I
> doubt you'll get a "yes". My que
Richard Torkar wrote:
>
> Well David, there is such a "manual".
>
> http://ftp.sunet.se/LDP/FAQ/faqs/GCC-SIG11-FAQ
Yes. And if you ask the average new Linux user if they've read it, I
doubt you'll get a "yes". My question boils down to this, and this I
suppose is a personal/informational requ
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
David Riley wrote:
> Jeff Epler wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 21, 2000 at 04:08:26PM -0500, David Riley wrote:
> > > Windoze is not the only OS to handle bad hardware better than Linux. On
> > > my Mac, I had a bad DIMM that worked fine on the MacOS si
Jeff Epler wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 21, 2000 at 04:08:26PM -0500, David Riley wrote:
> > Windoze is not the only OS to handle bad hardware better than Linux. On
> > my Mac, I had a bad DIMM that worked fine on the MacOS side, but kept
> > causing random bus-type errors in Linux. Same as when I ac
> > This is true. What I suppose would be the solution is that if faulty
> > hardware is found, a reduction in performance should be made.
>
> Finding out if you've got bad RAM might take a few hours running mem86. Not
> exactly what I have in mind to do each boot...
Even if memtest doesn't fin
On Tue, 21 Nov 2000, Horst von Brand wrote:
> David Riley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > This is true. What I suppose would be the solution is that if faulty
> > hardware is found, a reduction in performance should be made.
> Finding out if you've got bad RAM might take a few hours running mem86.
David Riley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
[...]
> This is true. What I suppose would be the solution is that if faulty
> hardware is found, a reduction in performance should be made.
Finding out if you've got bad RAM might take a few hours running mem86. Not
exactly what I have in mind to do each
David Riley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Horst von Brand wrote:
> > So what? My former machine ran fine with Win95/WinNT. Linux wouldn't even
> > end booting the kernel. Reason: P/100 was running at 120Mhz. Fixed that, no
> > trouble for years. Not the only case of WinXX running (apparently?) fine
On Tue, Nov 21, 2000 at 04:08:26PM -0500, David Riley wrote:
> Windoze is not the only OS to handle bad hardware better than Linux. On
> my Mac, I had a bad DIMM that worked fine on the MacOS side, but kept
> causing random bus-type errors in Linux. Same as when I accidentally
> (long story) ove
On Tue, 21 Nov 2000, David Riley wrote:
> Horst von Brand wrote:
>
> Windoze is not the only OS to handle bad hardware better than Linux. On
> my Mac, I had a bad DIMM that worked fine on the MacOS side, but kept
> causing random bus-type errors in Linux. Same as when I accidentally
I believe
On Tue, 21 Nov 2000, David Riley wrote:
> Horst von Brand wrote:
> >
> > So what? My former machine ran fine with Win95/WinNT. Linux wouldn't even
> > end booting the kernel. Reason: P/100 was running at 120Mhz. Fixed that, no
> > trouble for years. Not the only case of WinXX running (apparent
AIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Defective Red Hat Distribution poorly represents Linux
>
> David Lang wrote:
> >
> > David, usually when it turns out that Linux finds hardware problems the
> > underlying cause is that linux makes more effective use
David Lang wrote:
>
> David, usually when it turns out that Linux finds hardware problems the
> underlying cause is that linux makes more effective use of the component,
> and as such something that was marginal under windows fails under linux as
> the correct timing is used.
This is true. What
wrote:
> Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 16:08:26 -0500
> From: David Riley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: unlisted-recipients: ;
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Defective Red Hat Distribution poorly represents Linux
>
> Horst von Brand wrote:
> >
> > So what? My f
Horst von Brand wrote:
>
> So what? My former machine ran fine with Win95/WinNT. Linux wouldn't even
> end booting the kernel. Reason: P/100 was running at 120Mhz. Fixed that, no
> trouble for years. Not the only case of WinXX running (apparently?) fine
> on broken/misconfigured hardware I've see
[Albert D. Cahalan]
> If one disk works and another one not, one might suspect
> that the wrong DMA mode is being used in the crashing case.
So, what DMA mode do *you* usually set for aic7xxx? (: (:
Peter
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a
> These are hardware problems, not software. Programs like gcc and ld
> segfaulting like this is NOT a software problem.
>
> Please don't turn up with some 'hey, it worked with my disk', that's no
> clue that the distrib is bad. The same arguments as 'it works with
> Windows'.
This could be a
Ben Ford wrote:
> Ya, I also had a system that ran many OS's great, including Linux, Win98,
> Win2k, etc. However when I went to install NT on it, the CPU overheated
> every time. Ya, I know, doesn't make sense, but that's how it was.
>
> -b
>
>
It makes sense for me as win2000 is always 5°c h
On Mon, 20 Nov 2000, Paul Fulghum wrote:
> When in fact according to this linux-kernel post:
> http://www.uwsg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/9912.1/0653.html
> they are goats that eat fermented potatoes.
Hahaha, gotta love flame wars =)
pavel
--
Bask in the glow of the digital silence
http://w
Ya, I also had a system that ran many OS's great, including Linux, Win98,
Win2k, etc. However when I went to install NT on it, the CPU overheated
every time. Ya, I know, doesn't make sense, but that's how it was.
-b
John Jasen wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Nov 2000, Charles Turner, Ph.D. wrote:
>
> >
Tigran Aivazian wrote:
>
> 3) edit /etc/ftpusers to allow root ftp
>
> 4) edit /etc/pam.d/login and /etc/pam.d/rlogin to comment out securetty
> PAM module (so we can telnet as root on _any_ tty)
Not into security are you?
-b
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux
John Jasen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
[...]
> On this note, I recall a time that I 'appropriated' a workstation for
> linux.
>
> It was pulled out of the student labs, where it had worked for 3 months
> running NT 4.0, but the RH install kept on crashing out.
So what? My former machine ran fine
On Mon, Nov 20, 2000 at 08:53:19AM -0500, Charles Turner, Ph.D. wrote:
> [root@merrimac linux-2.2.17]# make dep
> gcc -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -O2 -fomit-frame-pointer -o scripts/mkdep
>scripts/mkdep.c
> collect2: ld terminated with signal 11 [Segmentation fault], core dumped
> make: *** [script
> it's heck of alot better if we don't have a user that later
> thinks 'Damn, linux developers are meanies'...
>
> Mohammad A. Haque http://www.haque.net/
When in fact according to this linux-kernel post:
http://www.uwsg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/9912.1/0653.html
Can everyone lay off this guy, he made a mistake and the heat is not cool.
This is no way for the general masses to get a taste of Linux, cool?
Please jsut let it die or offline the chap.
Regards,
Andre Hedrick
CTO Timpanogas Research Group
EVP Linux Development, TRG
Linux ATA Development
-
To
To Charles:
I see your intentions but you really want to take this up with Redhat
and some linux advocacy groups. linux-kernel really doesnt need to deal
with things like gcc being broken and such (which I don't think is your
case; check your hardware -- my reason? I've deployed RH 6.2 on 20 or
so
On Mon, 20 Nov 2000, Charles Turner, Ph.D. wrote:
These are hardware problems, not software. Programs like gcc and ld
segfaulting like this is NOT a software problem.
Please don't turn up with some 'hey, it worked with my disk', that's no
clue that the distrib is bad. The same arguments as 'i
Same experince here
Boxes ran perfectly fine with Windows (95/98/NT) but barfed with linux.
RAM replacement fixed it. Now whenever I see a signal 11 with gcc memory
is the first thing I go after.
On Mon, 20 Nov 2000, John Jasen wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Nov 2000, Charles Turner, Ph.D. wrote:
> On
On Mon, 20 Nov 2000, Charles Turner, Ph.D. wrote:
> (4) For those who think the hardware is broken; The hardware worked
> for six months using Windows/2000. It has a NT core.
On this note, I recall a time that I 'appropriated' a workstation for
linux.
It was pulled out of the student la
At the risk of being flamed for a distribution type discussion...
Security nuts are probably rolling on the floor laughing at you for
these two. I can think of some situations where these would be usefull
though.
On Mon, 20 Nov 2000, Tigran Aivazian wrote:
> 3) edit /etc/ftpusers to allow root
On Mon, 20 Nov 2000, Tigran Aivazian wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Nov 2000, Charles Turner, Ph.D. wrote:
> > I certainly don't know what to purchase for my
> > next attempt at a "shrink-wrap" installation.
>
> Try Red Hat 7.0 -- it is certainly better. True, no distribution is
[SNIPPED...]
I jus
On Mon, 20 Nov 2000, Bernhard Rosenkraenzer wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Nov 2000, Tigran Aivazian wrote:
>
> > Try Red Hat 7.0 -- it is certainly better. True, no distribution is
> > perfect but over the years I've developed my own CD image upgrade.iso
> > which goes directly after installing latest Red
Charles Turner, Ph.D. wrote:
> I can even see obvious bugs in the trace, i.e., :
> stat("/usrusr/lib/ldscripts", 0xba7c) = -1 ENOENT (No such file or directory)
Probably only a cosmetic problem. A regular run (RedHat binutils-2.9.5.0.22-6)
yields:
stat("/usrusr/lib/ldscripts", 0xb5c4) =
On Mon, Nov 20, 2000 at 08:53:19AM -0500, Charles Turner, Ph.D. wrote:
Charles,
6.2 is one of te better distributions. You should also go talk to RedHat
directly.
Jeff
>
> I tried to help a friend this weekend convert to Linux.
> He lives in Upstate New York, so it was a long trip from
>
On Mon, 20 Nov 2000, Tigran Aivazian wrote:
> Try Red Hat 7.0 -- it is certainly better. True, no distribution is
> perfect but over the years I've developed my own CD image upgrade.iso
> which goes directly after installing latest Red Hat distribution. It is
> full of things like BRS, dict(1), '
Wrong list, but this needs to be set straight. Please send any further
problem reports about Red Hat Linux to http://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla
> I was terribly wrong. This Red Hat version is irrevocably defective.
With the exception that it works for everyone else.
> (1) It will not create
> "Charles" == Charles Turner, Ph D <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Charles> It had been running Windows 2000 "Professional". Several
Charles> months ago, he purchased Red Hat "DELUXE" version 6.2. He was
Charles> unable to install it. I convinced him that installation was
Charles> easy.
Charles
On Mon, Nov 20, 2000 at 08:53:19AM -0500, Charles Turner, Ph.D. wrote:
[snip]
> I was terribly wrong. This Red Hat version is irrevocably defective.
[snip]
> (3) It "sort of" worked. However, network daemons kept
> dropping core. X would eventually crash, leaving the
> terminal in an
On Mon, 20 Nov 2000, Charles Turner, Ph.D. wrote:
> I certainly don't know what to purchase for my
> next attempt at a "shrink-wrap" installation.
Try Red Hat 7.0 -- it is certainly better. True, no distribution is
perfect but over the years I've developed my own CD image upgrade.iso
> Charles Turner, Ph D writes:
> I tried to help a friend this weekend convert to Linux.
> He lives in Upstate New York, so it was a long trip from
> Cambridge, Massachusetts.
> I was terribly wrong. This Red Hat version is irrevocably defective.
This list is about problems with the Lin
You're complaining on the wrong list.
On Mon, 20 Nov 2000, Charles Turner, Ph.D. wrote:
>
> I tried to help a friend this weekend convert to Linux.
> He lives in Upstate New York, so it was a long trip from
> Cambridge, Massachusetts.
>
> He has a Dual Pentium III, 600 MHz TYAN "Thunderbolt".
>
I tried to help a friend this weekend convert to Linux.
He lives in Upstate New York, so it was a long trip from
Cambridge, Massachusetts.
He has a Dual Pentium III, 600 MHz TYAN "Thunderbolt".
It has a built-in Adaptec SCSI controller and Intel
100-base-T Ethernet controller. It also has 1/2 Gb
45 matches
Mail list logo
