Erm. I don't rightly remember.
It's certainly probable that I discussed my frustrations on this list
during the fiasco in more detail than I am giving now.
I don't even remember what finally got me to test the RAM—in my hazy
memory it was just desperately testing every hardware component on the
stupid thing.
I know I replaced the motherboard and the processor and the CD-ROM
drive and the power supply before I ever thought to test the
memory...d'oh!
If I said I checked the logs and found something about the RAM...then
I'd say I'm inclined to trust myself. ;-)
Simón
On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 3:48 PM, Steven Black <blacks@indiana.edu> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 03:41:11PM -0400, Simón Ruiz wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 3:34 PM, Shei, Shing-Shong <shei@cs.indiana.edu> wrote:
>> Since it relates to how memory is used, I only assumed that it was the
>> kernels that handled the errors with aplomb or not.
>
> I thought you said when you checked the logs, you actually saw a single
> line stating something about the RAM.
>
> Cheers,
>
> --
> Steven Black <blacks@indiana.edu> / KeyID: 8596FA8E
> Fingerprint: 108C 089C EFA4 832C BF07 78C2 DE71 5433 8596 FA8E
_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@linuxfan.com
http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug
No comments:
Post a Comment