Marcus Brinkmann schrieb am Mittwoch, den 26. September 2001:
> So, may it be that the loop in tenmicrosec was executed faster than the
> clock could go down? But that would be trifle strange as we have run the
> Hurd on mach faster machines than an AMD K6 400MHz and not have this bug
> (and any faster machine should show the same bug). I have personally run
> the Hurd on a Pentium III with 1GHz, and it worked just fine.
Well that's only one side of the truth. AMD had in those K6 series an
very fast loop optimation. It was so fast, that Windows couldn't boot
correctly, because they did also counting down a counter. The result was
used as a dividend which caused and division by zero. AMD removed this
optimation later, since most people thought it was AMD fault and not
MS... It might be the same here.
wagi
--
Daniel Wagner "use quit to exit"
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
GnuPG: 1024D/DCDE890A (public key available on any keyserver)
_______________________________________________
Bug-hurd mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-hurd
