A little more about memory testing: A good teste program must be very long, for one thing that nowdays memory are prone to random errors, not only repeatable ones. What I believe is usefull is something else: just check if it is there at all, if there are no holes (like the one at 16Mb inserted by some mis-configured bios), and other gross errors. That is more or less what the Bios "should" do. I agree more with Eric than with Tom (see bellow).

Alain

Eric Auer escreveu:
> HIMEM /TESTMEM:... is indeed not that useful. An exist-check might be
>   useful, but a check like "write own address to all 0x?????000 form
>   addresses" (to check if there is really RAM there and it is not
> multiple copies of the first 16 MB or something) will probably be
> useful to detect broken BIOS-hooking memory allocation schemes
> without wasting much CPU time.

tom ehlert escreveu:
himem /TESTMEM:ON|OFF
 really want a (bad) memory test in 1.0 ?
A> As bad as is MS's is, it did save me many times. Consider it not a A> _test_for_100%_ok_ but as a _test_if_exists_ and
I disagree.
If you want a memorytest (I don't question that), you can easily start
one in autoexec; even HIMEM /TEST might be useful
it's NOT intended to be a real memtest, but if you want one ...


A> you can understand how good it is.
if you understand how good it is (or _any_ other memtest) you have
more information then I (and a VERY technical understanding of it)

In fact I did have some information in memory tests, but that was a long time ago and probably a little outdated.


Alain


------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system administration.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1470&alloc_id=3638&op=click _______________________________________________ Freedos-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Reply via email to