On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 06:18:54AM -0700, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > > > On Sunday, 14 October 2012 20:16:40 UTC+8, Jeroen Demeyer wrote: > > > > On 2012-10-14 10:16, P Purkayastha wrote: > > > It is not whether the CPU has any bug. The sage binaries and the > > > libraries it depends on are (I believe) compiled with some minimal level > > > of optimization. Maybe some optimization got applied in the atlas > > > library which is not present in your cpu. > > As I said, I doubt that this can lead to Segmentation Faults. In this > > case, one should see an Illegal Instruction (SIGILL). > > > > It's easy to imagine, say, the same CPU command requiring a different > memory alignment on an older arc. > I haven't written a line of assembler since circa 1989 (although plenty > before that :-)) and I don't speak x86 assembler, but, you know... > > >
Please make it clear you don't support generic x86_64, only the CPUs you like :))))))) I didn't understand did someone try it on 10.04 probably in VM? 12.04 certainly depends on ubuntu's libgfortran3 and it may be remotely possible it is the culprit. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-support" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support?hl=en.
