Ch 5 - gcc-3.3.1 - pass 1

Yann E. MORIN yann.morin.1998 at
Sun Nov 23 10:43:05 PST 2003

Once upon a time (on Sunday 23 November 2003 13:37), Greg Schafer wrote :
 > On Sun, Nov 23, 2003 at 01:05:00PM +0100, Yann E. MORIN wrote:
 > > make[2]: *** [s-attrtab] Error 139
 > Any chance you accidentally applied the GCC Specs patch? The specs patch
 > is applicable only in pass 2.


Ladies and gentlemen, let's welcome our guests of the WE!

They have all had outstanding success, as well as astonishing big
failures in their prize list. Let's welcome...
  - Mr gcc-2.95.3, vintage compiler, but still the one of choice for
    kernel compiles,
  - Miss glibc-2.1.3, quite old as well, but still valiant,
  - Mr Pentium 75 and its F00F bug!
  - Mme RAM, and her ability to hide or show her faulty parts in
    different configurations.

And the winner of the great compile failure of the WE is... Tadaaa!
Congrats go tooo... RAM!!! RAM is the winner! Congratulations!!!


Well, enough for this, now the serious part.

I have 64MiB RAM, aged the same of the machine, that is 9 years, coming
in 4 stick of 16MiB EDO DRAM each.
All info found on the net would pertain to segfaults with no core
dumped, but no real answer as why that would happen.. So took my screw
driver and open the beast. Removed half the RAM, leaving 32MiB which
ought to be enough for booting the kernel, rebooted. Kernel complains
about killing idle task. Surely that's no good at all... Removed the
remaining RAM, plugged back the other half, and booted again. Still
killing idle task... Bad, reaaalll baaaad.

At that time, I was starting to be a bit anxious, as that would mean
all my memory was damaged, so I switched banks and rebooted again.
Still the same with all possible layouts of RAM in banks. Remember
also that in time of Pentium, memory should go by pair... :-/

So I plugged back all the memory, and it booted OK. Bah, I said, I must
have made a mistake, so I removed the RAM again, and tested again all
possible combinations : I was still killing idle task... :-(

So, I can conclude that my RAM is at fault here, but I can't find
the faulty module. Will have to run memtest86 to test the machine...
And I shall not use it as a firewall any longer, but I have no other
spare machine. Shit...

Thanks for reading!

|  Yann E. MORIN  | Real-Time Embedded | /"\   ASCII RIBBON            |
| +0/33 662376056 | Software  Designer | \ /     CAMPAIGN           ^  |
| --==< °_° >==-- °---.----------------:  X    AGAINST HTML        /e\ |
| web: | SETI at home 2518 | / \  IN MAIL & NEWS       """ |
 \__ np:  [Stopped] __________________________________________________/

More information about the lfs-support mailing list