Ken Moffat wrote:
On Sat, Nov 08, 2014 at 03:39:23PM -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
Ken Moffat wrote:
Yes, I tried memtest and it only recognized 3.1G.
In that case, it is not a kernel problem. I can remember some of
my whatever-was-cheap hardware over the years : many motherboards
were definitely not built in the expectation that people would fit
all the memory which could in theory be used.
I never touched Dell machines with the proverbial barge-pole, and
certainly in _this_ country they were often not cheap, but I suspect
somebody saved a cent by putting something in the address space
because "nobody would really want to use 4GB of RAM with this on
Windows XP" (the PDF at
www.dell.com/support/home/us/en/19/product-support/product/precision-370/manuals
specifically mentions XP). Yes, I know that XP supported up to 4GB.
But the link at http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/25007815
suggests that not all XP systems managed to make 4GB usable. At
least you are doing better than the 2.5GB at the bottom end of the
range in that post.
Perhaps something in
http://en.community.dell.com/support-forums/desktop/f/3514/t/19449295
might either help, or console, you ?
FWIW, motherboard manufacturers who talk about a Mobo "supporting"
a certain amount of RAM usually mean "it boots with sticks of that
nominal capacity and we do not know, or care, how much of the RAM you
can actually use". No idea if Dell was like that for this product,
Good points Ken. I've decided it is a HW issue and will let it go. My
biggest problem was the speed of SM and not that I cna build it with
optimization, that is handled.
Speaking of SM, many pages give errors now for jpegs (but not all
jpegs). I did update to libjpeg-turbo-1.3.1, as a part of the upgrade,
so I don't know if that's it or not. I am rebuilding SM with internal
jpeg to see if that makes a difference.
-- Bruce
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Do not top post on this list.
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style
