From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1S0eKN-00021n-OS for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 23 Feb 2012 19:27:44 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id DE2C4E0DBB; Thu, 23 Feb 2012 19:27:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C91E6E0D9A for ; Thu, 23 Feb 2012 19:25:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 643FD1B4019 for ; Thu, 23 Feb 2012 19:25:45 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new using ClamAV at gentoo.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.199 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=0.946, BAYES_00=-1.9, FSL_RCVD_USER=0.001, RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO=1.164, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=no Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MShYn9awAViI for ; Thu, 23 Feb 2012 19:25:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from plane.gmane.org (plane.gmane.org [80.91.229.3]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 43A901B4008 for ; Thu, 23 Feb 2012 19:25:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1S0eIE-0000Yq-3A for gentoo-user@gentoo.org; Thu, 23 Feb 2012 20:25:30 +0100 Received: from 80.249.84.136 ([80.249.84.136]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 23 Feb 2012 20:25:30 +0100 Received: from valahanovich by 80.249.84.136 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 23 Feb 2012 20:25:30 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org From: Heorhi Valakhanovich Subject: [gentoo-user] Re: gcc fails and then succeeds - definitely a problem? Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2012 22:25:20 +0300 Message-ID: <20120223222520.1c886004@tormoz-pc> References: Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 80.249.84.136 X-Newsreader: Claws Mail 3.8.0 (GTK+ 2.24.8; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) X-Archives-Salt: 6285cc8f-8929-43f3-bdcd-404b53cdecc0 X-Archives-Hash: 87683e5845b82ee29a5873d4e5d8aea7 On Thu, 23 Feb 2012 11:17:54 -0800 Grant wrote: > The gcc update just failed to compile on one of my systems with a > segfault, but then succeeded after trying again even though I didn't > change anything. Does that indicate a hardware problem for sure? > Should I run memtester? Any other tests to run? Nothing in dmesg. > > - Grant > > Building gcc usually requires large amount of memory. May be you haven't enough first time.