> If you were using PaX, and indeed hardened gentoo, then you would be a > very long way from what most people here are doing. I will be very > surprised if that is the case.
Indeed you should! ;-) No, I'm not using PaX, just that page suggests that things it's doing to harden a system cause Firefox to crash with this error message I'm also getting, and the only change here is going from patch level 62 to 134, which is patching hardware vulnerabilities of this Core2 Duo Conroe. I'm speculating the kernel patches are doing about what PaX does that crashes Firefox. [16:56 Documentation]$ ls admin-guide/hw-vuln/ index.rst l1tf.rst mds.rst spectre.rst [16:57 ~]$ cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/vulnerabilities/* Mitigation: PTE Inversion Vulnerable: Clear CPU buffers attempted, no microcode; SMT disabled Mitigation: PTI Vulnerable Mitigation: __user pointer sanitization Mitigation: Full generic retpoline, STIBP: disabled, RSB filling >It might also be that changes at the problematic pages happened >independently, and this is the first time you've visited them since >changing the kernel. If so, booting the previous kernel (if that is >all you changed) will test that. Indeed so. I made a new, fresh installation on a clean partition so there's no contamination. No other changes. (Does bringing across everything in /home/paul count?) I do indeed still have the system at patchlevel 62 running, and it doesn't crash. The pages are at yahoo.com/finance, et al., which itself crashes. But then it's calling a bunch of other stuff to present. The email client page I'm using at this moment doesn't crash, nor does the BLFS list archive. > But in all seriousness, I don't think 8.1 has any reasonable desktop > usage now, other than to allow you to build a current LFS. It does do all I need it to do. I'm afraid it'll have to do. My 75th birthday was last month, 2 days before D-Day. (Brits probably remember that better than Americans.) We all age at our own rate. I find I'm making mental mistakes I never should. Building a "POD-9.0" would be a more complex juggling act than I'd be advised to attempt. I haven't installed this version on an i7 yet. Possibly one of these kernel patches that causes problems on this Conroe would be compatible with my Bloomfield & Sandy Bridge. If that works I could fork this for i7's, and try an intermediate kernel patch for the Conroe. But it'd be nice to resolve this. -- Paul Rogers [email protected] Rogers' Second Law: "Everything you do communicates." (I do not personally endorse any additions after this line. TANSTAAFL :-) -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
