SlackwareThis Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Introduction to Linux - A Hands on Guide
This guide was created as an overview of the Linux Operating System, geared toward new users as an exploration tour and getting started guide, with exercises at the end of each chapter.
For more advanced trainees it can be a desktop reference, and a collection of the base knowledge needed to proceed with system and network administration. This book contains many real life examples derived from the author's experience as a Linux system and network administrator, trainer and consultant. They hope these examples will help you to get a better understanding of the Linux system and that you feel encouraged to try out things on your own.
Click Here to receive this Complete Guide absolutely free.
Because it was my post that first raised this issue, I wanted to let people know that this still exists. To rule out my build process, I used the stock slackware-current 3.8.8 kernel-huge-smp kernel and modules that were just updated. Kernel oops. Rebuild using gcc 4.7.2 and the kernel-huge-smp config file and everything is fine. I'm hoping that with gcc 4.8.1 everything will right itself. Anyone else with a 5-6 year old laptop that can test this?
Mine is a HP 6715b. Its not the individual machine because I have 2 of these models and both behave the same. I've compiled every 3.x.x kernel as they've come out without issue. If its the same story with 3.9.0 kernel I'll inform the radeon devs.
I'm hoping that with gcc 4.8.1 everything will right itself.
You're assuming that it's a compiler bug. It might very well be a bad section of ati-driver or kernel code that is working purely by accident on the kernel compiled with the older gcc and that changes introduced with the newer gcc have merely exposed it.
This is a complete stab in the dark but the new 'aggressive-loop-optimizations" thing has been seen to expose problems elsewhere when encountering badly written code. Might be worth trying to compile with -fno-aggressive-loop-optimizations (I'm not certain but it looks like the makefile provides a KCFLAGS= for adding additional user supplied CFLAGS).