Ed - Thanks for the insight and criticism. I hope my reply was not construed negatively. My effort to engage in technical conversations over email was a little naive perhaps; I was simply trying to counter the suggestion and find out a little more. As you suggest, I certainly do not have a lifetime's experience with linux. As I did not know the relationship between memory, linux, and segfaults, I know now because I asked. :) I'll be running memtest86 as you suggested, and I'll post the results. Thanks, Spencer <div>On 10/5/05, Edward Dekkers <<a href="mailto:edward@tripled.iinet.net.au">edward@tripled.iinet.net.au</a>> wrote:<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> Spencer Kellis wrote: > I would have thought bad memory would be manifest in many more ways than > simply yum not working. My system is otherwise stable, and has been up > and operating for a week currently without any other issues. I > appreciate the idea though, and if you still consider bad memory an > option I'd be interested to hear it (and how & why). > > If there are any other ideas out there, even pointers to what to look > through for possible problems on my own, I'd appreciate it. > > Thanks, > Spencer The reason he would have suggested it is because it's probably the #1 cause of segmentation faults and signal 11 faults on Linux, together with bad hardware. This isn't Windows and you aren't in Kansas any more. Linux is super stable and if it crashes, it is more than likely not actually Linux's fault. Trust the reply to your post - run a memtest86 overnight on full testing suite, don't question a perfectly reasonable response. I think the person who replied has been around Linux longer than you from what I can see. If the memory tests OK, fine, we'll look at something else, but you really need to eliminate it 100% sure before we go on. Regards, Ed. </blockquote></div> -- <a href="http://www.spencerkellis.net">www.spencerkellis.net</a>