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 1S0eUD-00048b-Am for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 23 Feb 2012 19:37:53 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id DBEBFE0D96; Thu, 23 Feb 2012 19:37:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-bk0-f53.google.com (mail-bk0-f53.google.com [209.85.214.53]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38BFEE0C5C for ; Thu, 23 Feb 2012 19:36:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: by bkcit16 with SMTP id it16so1576376bkc.40 for ; Thu, 23 Feb 2012 11:36:10 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of mikemol@gmail.com designates 10.204.10.89 as permitted sender) client-ip=10.204.10.89; Authentication-Results: mr.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of mikemol@gmail.com designates 10.204.10.89 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=mikemol@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=mikemol@gmail.com Received: from mr.google.com ([10.204.10.89]) by 10.204.10.89 with SMTP id o25mr1429687bko.14.1330025770418 (num_hops = 1); Thu, 23 Feb 2012 11:36:10 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=C8dy5L2q4ml3vm37dSthWR2JZsD/is7KT89Mhp6BVu0=; b=Mh1rsJwraPT4GrRou46j38aHX9dr3rOAIioRmWGs4S8KIzk7ZjQdt24T/7OI5R9Onk EVCLNpVGzGoO+wiQfQq8DIdTeevAGtuY+aZPFZKypRkuTOTjqjh2O+njDofqlLsWO+Es N9QPg2C1zIomkfvuMgcp6QzBFRlmV9xQvVyXM= 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 Received: by 10.204.10.89 with SMTP id o25mr1184260bko.14.1330025770261; Thu, 23 Feb 2012 11:36:10 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.204.14.19 with HTTP; Thu, 23 Feb 2012 11:36:10 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2012 14:36:10 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] gcc fails and then succeeds - definitely a problem? From: Michael Mol To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: 43e1a8e2-cd1b-4837-a6ad-612d05b601e5 X-Archives-Hash: c537e9f85fe1a63a520abddd42ec1cf5 On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 2:28 PM, Mark Knecht wrote: > On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 11:17 AM, 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. =C2=A0Does that indicate a hardware problem for sure? >> Should I run memtester? =C2=A0Any other tests to run? =C2=A0Nothing in d= mesg. >> >> - Grant >> > > Might be.....might be nothing. Maybe a stray neutrino hit your > processor at just the wrong instant. ;-) > > More likely i my mind is some little corner condition in the software > running on your system. I've had the same thing happen many times > actually, and actually a few more times since I started playing with > your /etc/make.conf -j/-l values which push the system a little > harder. Whenever I get build failures with the load-adaptive MAKEOPTS and EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS, I check the build log to see if it's relatively obvious that something was depended upon before it was built. If so, I file a bug. Happens every month or so, for me. --=20 :wq