Date:	Wed, 19 Jan 2000 11:36:12 +0200 (IST)
From:	Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender:	eliz AT is
To:	jazir <entropic AT mpx DOT com DOT au>
cc:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: GCC bugs
In-Reply-To:	<3884186A.ACD7741A@mpx.com.au>
Message-ID:	<Pine.SUN.3.91.1000119113212.9609L-100000@is>
MIME-Version:	1.0
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	dj-admin AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

On Tue, 18 Jan 2000, jazir wrote:

> this should be right, but when i reported an internal compiler error they
> just blamed me for using M$ operating systems, and sed the msg usually
> indicated a hardware problem.  

Because you told them your problem was not reproducible: it would 
sometimes happen, sometimes not.  It is also my experience that such
problems *usually* are caused by faulty hardware.

But if you can come up with a pattern of GCC invocations that 
consistently causes a crash (e.g., invoke GCC such and such 3 times, and 
it will crash on the 4th invocation), then I'm sure you will get a very 
different response.

As for the OS ``blame'': as far as I understand, that was supposed to be 
a joke.  Perhaps it was a bad joke, but you should expect such 
misunderstandings when people all over the world are talking to one 
another in a language (English) which many of them don't know well.

- Raw text -