Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
--On Monday, May 11, 2009 9:06 AM -0400 Aaron Richton richton@nbcs.rutgers.edu wrote:
I've had a spurt of bad luck with 2.4.16 (it appears Quanah and a few others may share that opinion). The seg faults inspired me to run under libumem, which has some interesting features that give you "moderate" debug ability in exchange for moderate performance hit -- small enough that I can run it hot safely, unlike full-featured memory debuggers.
At this point a RE24 checkout from late Saturday has been good for me in production, with some moderate libumem checks enabled. Is everybody else starting to see RE24 shape up? Bottom line...I think I'm now +1 for encouraging a 2.4.17 train, for what it's worth...
Overall, RE24 looks a lot better than 2.4.16, yes.
I'm still experiencing make test to fail occassionally in various tests (e.g. see ITS#6126).
Ciao, Michael.