Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.mel.connect.com.au!munnari.OZ.AU!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!solaris.cc.vt.edu!news.mathworks.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!jraynard.demon.co.uk!not-for-mail From: james@jraynard.demon.co.uk (James Raynard) Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Subject: Re: Signal 11 Date: 26 May 1996 19:23:08 -0000 Organization: A FreeBSD Box Lines: 25 Message-ID: <4oab2s$ch@jraynard.demon.co.uk> References: <nD356D43A@longacre.demon.co.uk> <4o7hcp$8hk@dyson.iquest.net> <nD454577C@longacre.demon.co.uk> NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.demon.co.uk X-NNTP-Posting-Host: jraynard.demon.co.uk In article <nD454577C@longacre.demon.co.uk>, Michael Searle <searle@longacre.demon.co.uk> wrote: >I don't have any other PCs to test it on - does anyone know of any problems >with sox or olvwm (the processes giving signal 11) or xperfmon++, >xdaliclock, xterm, xfm (that I was running at the same time)? Not as far as I know - a lot of people have been running these without any problems. Your next paragraph gives a clue, though:- >All of these are straight out of packages. I am running a -O2 kernel, but I >think one of the signal 11s was before I changed, although after I got rid >of stuff I didn't need from GENERIC. This is definitely not a good idea. There are known to be bugs in the gcc i386 optimiser which cause bad code to be generated with the -O2 option. While there are work-arounds, the default option of -O for the kernel build is the recommended one. -- James Raynard, Edinburgh, Scotland jraynard@dial.pipex.com james@jraynard.demon.co.uk