Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 13 Nov 2004 15:20:49 -0800
From:      "Ted Mittelstaedt" <tedm@toybox.placo.com>
To:        "Eric Schuele" <e.schuele@computer.org>, <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
Subject:   RE: Everything randomly generates .core files
Message-ID:  <LOBBIFDAGNMAMLGJJCKNMEKJEPAA.tedm@toybox.placo.com>
In-Reply-To: <4196568B.5050600@computer.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eric Schuele [mailto:e.schuele@computer.org]
> Sent: Saturday, November 13, 2004 10:47 AM
> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Ted Mittelstaedt
> Subject: Re: Everything randomly generates .core files
>
>
> It's running on a Dell Inspiron 5100.  I've had it less than a year.
> Ran windows fine.  Ran FreeBSD 5.2.1-RELEASE fine.. 5.3-BETA7 as well.
> Just started a day or so ago, when I formatted and installed
> 5.3-RELEASE.

Send a complaint to Dell.  Dell hasn't been known in the past for
support of non-Windows operating systems.  When asked why, Dell claims
that none of their customers want to run non-Windows operating systems.

If you don't complain to Dell then your just supporting their
assertation that none of their customers want to run non-Windows
operating systems.

Now, Hewlett Packard/Compaq, by contrast, not only believes their
customers want to run non-Windows operating systems, they even
have a public test site - and FreeBSD is on it! See:

http://www.testdrive.hp.com

Perhaps bringing this up with Dell might spur some attention?

> I guess some partial failure could have coincided with the
> install.

Oh baloney.  I would bet a lunch that if you reformatted your
hard disk and reinstalled whatever version of Windows was supplied
with your Dell, it would run perfectly.

Windows runs on marginal hardware, UNIX does not.  Period.  Windows
does because it's designed to run on marginal hardware - because of
people like Dell who cut every corner in the book to get their stuff
as cheap as possible, and as a result, have large market share.

> I did not have the chance to run memtest yet....  but will
> today/tonight
>
> Another thought... assuming its a hardware issue.  I would expect it to
> manifest itself under greater loads such as when building a port. As
> opposed to sitting idly while browsing the filesystem with xfe. One
> example is the OpenOffice port.... building that took forever... the
> entire time the CPU was pegged 95%-100%... but nothing hiccuped.  even
> had xfe up, and while browsing the web.
>

Yeah, right.  OK go ahead and try to make some logical sense if it makes
you feel better.  Your wasting your time.

Bad hardware is NOT logical in how it fails.  I've dealt with many systems
in the past that were iffy hardware.  Even some that ran earier versions of
FreeBSD fine  (or more accurately, versions of FreeBSD that were compiled by
earlier versions of GCC) then blew chunks on later versions.
(more accurately, versions of FreeBSD that were compiled by later versions
of GCC)

There is never any logic when you have marginal hardware.

If you really believe that your hardware has failed then reload Windows
and when Windows blows up, call Dell.  Your system is still under Dell
warranty.  They will replace the bad hardware.  But I doubt you have
failed hardware.  I think you have hardware that was designed to run
Windows and that Windows was designed to run on - and simply does not
include any features that aren't directly required by Windows.

Remember, if Dell can save 5 cents by not including a chip that is
supposed to be there on an industry standard motherboard, yet isn't
required by Windows, they are going to do it.  This isn't personal it
is just SOP for manufacturers that build the volume that Dell builds.
The automakers do it all of the time.

Ted



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?LOBBIFDAGNMAMLGJJCKNMEKJEPAA.tedm>