Date: Mon, 3 Sep 2001 17:26:22 +0300 (IDT) From: Eli Zaretskii X-Sender: eliz AT is To: Juan Manuel Guerrero cc: pavenis AT lanet DOT lv, djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com Subject: Re: gcc301 difficulty In-Reply-To: <61357C1227C@HRZ1.hrz.tu-darmstadt.de> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com Precedence: bulk On Mon, 3 Sep 2001, Juan Manuel Guerrero wrote: > The only way to get gcc-301 working is to disable the internal > CPU cache (using BIOS settings). Disabling on-board L2 cache has > no influence. Such problems generally point to a faulty memory. So if all the modifications you tried used the same memory chips, I'd suggest to replace them, or try some different memory configuration (e.g., as suggested by Martin). If that doesn't help either, replace the CPU. I once detected a faulty (a bit too slow) Intel clone by compiling a large source file with GCC. It's a known fact that a GCC compilation is a good diagnostic tool, since GCC consumes lots of memory, moves large buffers to and fro, and runs the CPU at full throttle for prolonged periods of time. > I am very sorprised about all this. I have been using gcc30b.zip > for a month without any difficulty. I expected gcc301b.zip > to be only a minor bug fix release and not to cause such > difficulties. Andris, did you use any different optimization switches when you built GCC 3.0.1, or maybe a different version of Binutils (the assembler matters the most, I think)?