On Mon, 27 Apr 1998, Alex Hayward wrote:

> Hm. Odd..... I can't think of any reason for this, unless anything along
> the lines of the cc binaries/some shared libraries being corrupted has
> occurred.

Hmmmmm ... I've now tried the 20th January comp set, and the one which
came on the alpha cd, and cc1/cc1plus from your machine. Yours and my
alpha one give the same result - fatal signal 6 - and the 20th January one
gives a fatal signal 11, always in cc1. I'm still wondering whether or not
this is due to the bugged SA that I have, or something else ... 

Is it possible, then, that a system with the bugged SA and a compiler
which shouldn't work with it could compile the whole of qt (shared) 
without problem (as mine did) and then fail on bzip2, or is it more likely
that something has happened to my system in between? If so, what? (bearing
in mind that I've tried installing both comp sets) ... shared library
problem - does cc1 use a shared library? 

ld.so.conf points to /usr/lib, /usr/X11R6.3/lib, /usr/local/lib and
/usr/local/qt/lib ... and I ran ldconfig after installing qt to make it
work (which it does - at least, it runs its example programs).

> I get a few occasional kernel panics, but current seems to work reasonably
> now that the new vfork is fixed. There are a few other niggles, though,
> like the console code being awful.

Hmmm. Looks like my biggest problem right now could well be due to
hardware rather than anything else. Working out what to do about it is
proving rather difficult. Perhaps I should try to swap my SA with someone
who has a later revision but never wants to run NetBSD :) 

And once I can compile anything I'll try building my own kernel from
-current! Meanwhile, back to RiscOS .........

Cheers,

Bill