[ARGUS] Segmentation Fault with 2.0.6rc2 on FreeBSD 4.9-RELEASE

[Winfred Harrelson]

On Fri, 16 Apr 2004, Andrew Pollock wrote:

> I'm sorry, but I've always treated that as a fair amount of bollocks. Sure,
> the RAM could be a bit dodgey, but a segmentation violation (predominantly)
> means that a process tried to access some memory it shouldn't have. I don't
> believe in giving massive credence to the bam RAM theory, when it can
> actually be a coding problem.

I didn't mean to make anyone mad by my suggestion so I am sorry about
that.

I just thought it might be easier to swap our some hardware if you
could take the machine down.  It has been several days since you
reported the problem so I figured that testing hardware might be
relatively quick and easy compared to troubleshooting a software
problem.

As an aside, a friend of mine used to say that hardware guys always
blamed the software and software guys always blamed the hardware but
that it was almost always software that was buggy.  Even though he was
a hardware guy and therefore biased, he is right that it is more often
software.  (But I have still had a fair share of hardware problems.)

> http://www.google.com.au/search?q=define:Segmentation+fault+(segfault)

I got my info from here:

http://www.bitwizard.nl/sig11/

> If the *BSD people want to push bad RAM in favour of coding errors, they're
> either arrogant or just plain lazy.

The Bitwizard article seems to be written from a Linux perspective.

> Just my $0.05 worth...

Thats $0.05 more that I have.

Winfred