Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!simtel!agis!vtc.tacom.army.mil!ulowell.uml.edu!wang!news.kei.com!news.mathworks.com!news2.near.net!howland.reston.ans.net!EU.net!news.eunet.fi!KremlSun!rivendell.elvis.msk.su!news.uni-stuttgart.de!rz.uni-karlsruhe.de!thorin!brewhq.swb.de!news.th-darmstadt.de!hrz-ws11.hrz.uni-kassel.de!phase23!citylink.dinoex.sub.org!peter From: peter@citylink.dinoex.sub.org (Peter Much) Subject: Re: Slight flame from Linux user Organization: Buero fuer Sektenforschung und Qualitaetspruefung in der Esoterik Message-ID: <DA4EFE.690@citylink.dinoex.sub.org> References: <3ql3gd$je2@bell.maths.tcd.ie> <3r166m$fit@bonnie.tcd-dresden.de> <D9t6un.EqI@citylink.dinoex.sub.org> <3rh1ot$lnj@bonnie.tcd-dresden.de> Date: Tue, 13 Jun 1995 16:42:49 GMT Lines: 50 In article <3rh1ot$lnj@bonnie.tcd-dresden.de>, J Wunsch <joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de> wrote: >Moin Peter! > >Peter Much <peter@citylink.dinoex.sub.org> wrote: > >>>>> Fatal signal 11 syndrome is almost always a HARDWARE PROBLEM - > >>That's _NO_ hardware-problem. The day before yesterday we installed >>a Linux 1.2.8 onto one of our hardware-gurus' portable. The platform has >>already run other OS', at least an older Linux, maybe some *BSDs too. > >``Absence of evidence is no evidence of absence.'' This surely is true from a scientific viewpoint. Form anopther viewpoint, if i tell somebody: Your OS does not work, because you have a hardware problem, that guy may go to his computer-store and buy new hardware. Now, if we grab the next-best known-to-work hardware, and get the same problem, it is quite likely that buying new hardware may not help, too. Surely, this is an unsatisfying situation. So, we first should make clear what is meant with "working hardware". In my viewpoint, if some hardware is able to stable run an unix-like OS, it is ok. If the next unix-like OS reports trouble, i don't think the hardware got bad by installing the new OS.;) One the other hand, if i develop software that does run on some machines, and does not on others, i would consider these other machines as in- compatible or defectious. Over all, it will likely boil down to production tolerances, ill docu- mentations, or the like, where it is quite unclear, whose fault they are. Anyway, it's not a big help to the end-user, telling him his hardware is no good. >>The linux kernel is loosing interrupts. > >How the hell do losing interrupts correspond to Sig 11's? I don't know, and i think i don't even want to find out any more. An easy answer would be: Both arise due to consistency problems. The *BSD's have a big advantage there, since the OS' are kept very consistent, which on one hand slows down development, but on the other might likely avoid these problems. Peter -- Write to: Peter Much * Koelnische Str. 22 * D-34117 Kassel * +49-561-774961 peter@citylink.dinoex.sub.org much@hrz.uni-kassel.de p.much@asco.nev.sub.de