The symptoms that I have noted are that a kernel compilation (or similar
operation) will fail at a particular point with some consistency.
I have personally gotten 1 Oops, 10 sig11's and a couple of hangs this
way. Underclocking the chip is also a viable solution if you cannot
get a usable fan (I ran a CX DX2/50 as a DX2/40 for a couple of months
until I was able to get a good replacement w/fan.. it worked).
So it is in part a kernel problem, but not one I would trade away.
The higher performance we are getting out of the new kernels is
quite simply harder on much of the hardware out there. We _could_
make Linux run as reliably as DOS, but then it wouldn't be as fast.
(maybe #ifdef BROKEN_HARDWARE
#define SLOW_EVERYTHING_DOWN
#endif
?)
Well, enough of a rant, thank you for reading this far.
Dan Taylor I fear no weevil.
> That doesn't mean you should all throw out Cyrix - there have been other
> manufacturers with buggy chips (including intel), and I'd be happy to try
> to come up with a fix for this problem. The real problem right now is
> that we don't know _what_ causes the Cyrix problem, so trying to fix it
> is pretty much hunt-and-peck unless somebody has some cyrix contacts?
>
> If anybody knows anybody that works for Cyrix, could you please speak up?
> Doesn't have to be technical personell - we can try to get the addresses
> of some really technical people from the marketing people if anybody
> knows those scumbags ;-)
>
> I wouldn't like to ask for this information on the announce newsgroup (if
> we can do this silently without upsetting a lot of people I'd be
> happier), but that would be one way to reach a lot of people...
>
> Linus
>