On Sat, Apr 28, 2007 at 02:10:16AM -0700, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
> The true value of Wikipedia is that it can deal with controversial
> subjects. ...
on the other hand, for some instances it doesn't _deal_ with controversial
subjects, but only reflects the most common opinion. Currently(*) the
on (was Re: Discussion of the
> relativeadvantages/disadvantages of PAE (was Re: Memory >3.5GB not
> used?))
>
>
> On 27/04/07, Bart Silverstrim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > We don't devote time and
> > resources into being "renaissance pe
On 27/04/07, Bart Silverstrim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
We don't devote time and
resources into being "renaissance people".
Human intelligence is hardly limited in that regard.
While I do not subscribe to the Colin Wilson theory,
the vast majority of people contain so little information
it is
n of therelative
> advantages/disadvantages of PAE (was Re: Memory>3.5GB not used?))
>
>
>
> On Apr 25, 2007, at 3:51 PM, Paul Schmehl wrote:
>
> > --On Wednesday, April 25, 2007 15:29:04 -0400 Thomas Dickey
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> O
On Apr 25, 2007, at 3:51 PM, Paul Schmehl wrote:
--On Wednesday, April 25, 2007 15:29:04 -0400 Thomas Dickey
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 01:15:03PM -0600, Chad Perrin wrote:
No kidding. That professor should have his Wikipedia account
banned,
and the head of his de
On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 03:59:43PM +0200, Svein Halvor Halvorsen
wrote:
Bill Moran wrote:
A friend of mine going for his Dr. at CMU (Patrick Wagstrom:
GNOME guy)
describes an exercise where a professor intentionally injected
false
information into Wikipedia, then gave his students a research
On Thu, Apr 26, 2007 at 01:48:46PM -0400, Bill Moran wrote:
> In response to Chad Perrin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
> > If you had provided the guy's Wikipedia account, we'd be able to check
> > *your* sources -- wouldn't we? As long as you don't tell us the
> > necessary information for checking u
In response to Chad Perrin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Thu, Apr 26, 2007 at 09:17:32AM -0400, Bill Moran wrote:
> >
> > Perhaps this was all just a devious plan by me to make you all look like
> > fools by watching your argue about the importance of checking sources
> > while none of you checked yo
On Thu, Apr 26, 2007 at 09:17:32AM -0400, Bill Moran wrote:
>
> Perhaps this was all just a devious plan by me to make you all look like
> fools by watching your argue about the importance of checking sources
> while none of you checked your sources ...
>
> Muhahaha ...
>
> In any event, it's be
Halvorsen
> >> Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2007 7:00 AM
> >> To: Lee Capps
> >> Cc: Thomas Dickey; Bill Moran; freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
> >> Subject: Re: Wikipedia's perfection (was Re: Discussion of the
> >> relative
> >> advantages/
: Wikipedia's perfection (was Re: Discussion of the
relative
advantages/disadvantages of PAE (was Re: Memory >3.5GB not used?))
Bill Moran wrote:
A friend of mine going for his Dr. at CMU (Patrick Wagstrom:
GNOME guy)
describes an exercise where a professor intentionally injected
Ivan Voras wrote:
Bill Moran wrote:
> Does this test demonstrate usage of memory over 4G? It's my
understanding
> that PAE starts to suffer when it has to look at the memory over 4G
(which
> is the problem it's intended to solve)
>
> If your entire test fits in under 4G, you're not seei
erfection (was Re: Discussion of the relative
> advantages/disadvantages of PAE (was Re: Memory >3.5GB not used?))
>
>
> Bill Moran wrote:
> >> A friend of mine going for his Dr. at CMU (Patrick Wagstrom: GNOME guy)
> >> describes an exercise where a professor inte
On Wednesday 25 April 2007 21:21:47 Thomas Dickey wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 01:58:55PM -0600, Chad Perrin wrote:
> > I definitely agree that's suboptimal. I'd expand that to include other
> > sorts of pages, other than webpages, as well. It's pretty rare for this
> > particular brand of in
On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 01:58:55PM -0600, Chad Perrin wrote:
> I definitely agree that's suboptimal. I'd expand that to include other
> sorts of pages, other than webpages, as well. It's pretty rare for this
> particular brand of intellectually lazy person to realize that about the
> printed page
On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 03:29:04PM -0400, Thomas Dickey wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 01:15:03PM -0600, Chad Perrin wrote:
> > No kidding. That professor should have his Wikipedia account banned,
> > and the head of his department should be informed of his vandalism. I
> > don't suppose you kn
--On Wednesday, April 25, 2007 15:29:04 -0400 Thomas Dickey
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 01:15:03PM -0600, Chad Perrin wrote:
No kidding. That professor should have his Wikipedia account banned,
and the head of his department should be informed of his vandalism. I
don't
On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 01:15:03PM -0600, Chad Perrin wrote:
> No kidding. That professor should have his Wikipedia account banned,
> and the head of his department should be informed of his vandalism. I
> don't suppose you know the name of his Wikipedia account, or his legal
> name. . . .
yawn.
On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 03:59:43PM +0200, Svein Halvor Halvorsen wrote:
> Bill Moran wrote:
> >>A friend of mine going for his Dr. at CMU (Patrick Wagstrom: GNOME guy)
> >>describes an exercise where a professor intentionally injected false
> >>information into Wikipedia, then gave his students a r
Bill Moran wrote:
A friend of mine going for his Dr. at CMU (Patrick Wagstrom: GNOME guy)
describes an exercise where a professor intentionally injected false
information into Wikipedia, then gave his students a research assignment
that involved that information. Apparently the number of student
On Apr 25, 2007, at 8:55 AM, Bill Moran wrote:
A friend of mine going for his Dr. at CMU (Patrick Wagstrom: GNOME
guy)
describes an exercise where a professor intentionally injected false
information into Wikipedia, then gave his students a research
assignment
that involved that informat
In response to Thomas Dickey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 08:31:53AM -0400, Bill Moran wrote:
> > (of course, everyone knows that Wikipedia is the ultimate source of
> > information and is infallible, right?)
>
> hardly. I'd expect that most intelligent readers would have encou
In response to RW <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 10:56:09 -0700
> "Don O'Neil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I just built a new server with an Athlon 64 x2, >
> >
> >...
> >
> > What if I want to install more than 4GB? This mobo supports up to 16
> > GB... Do I need to go to the A
On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 08:31:53AM -0400, Bill Moran wrote:
> (of course, everyone knows that Wikipedia is the ultimate source of
> information and is infallible, right?)
hardly. I'd expect that most intelligent readers would have encountered
at least one wikipedia article which is inaccurate. L
In response to Ivan Voras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Bill Moran wrote:
>
> > Does this test demonstrate usage of memory over 4G? It's my
> understanding
> > that PAE starts to suffer when it has to look at the memory over 4G
> (which
> > is the problem it's intended to solve)
> >
> > If your
On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 10:56:09 -0700
"Don O'Neil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I just built a new server with an Athlon 64 x2, >
>
>...
>
> What if I want to install more than 4GB? This mobo supports up to 16
> GB... Do I need to go to the AMD64 platform to get >4GB?
AFAIK all the reasons for stay
Le 24/04/2007 à 11:39:46-0700, Don O'Neil a écrit
> Thanks for all who pointed out the obvious PAE option...
>
> When I went to rebuild the kernel I got this message:
>
> +++
> cc -O2 -fno-strict-aliasing -pipe -Werror -D_KERNEL -DKLD_MODULE -nostdinc
> -I- -DHAVE_KERNE
Bill Moran wrote:
> Does this test demonstrate usage of memory over 4G? It's my
understanding
> that PAE starts to suffer when it has to look at the memory over 4G
(which
> is the problem it's intended to solve)
>
> If your entire test fits in under 4G, you're not seeing the worst of it.
> At
In response to Ivan Voras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Bill Moran wrote:
> > In response to "Don O'Neil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
> >> I never had this problem before when I built the kernel the first time.
> >> Could my module source be corrupt? If so, how do I re-install just the
> >> kernel sources
Bill Moran wrote:
> In response to "Don O'Neil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>> I never had this problem before when I built the kernel the first time.
>> Could my module source be corrupt? If so, how do I re-install just the
>> kernel sources for 6.1?
>
> Not all modules work with PAE. Read the examp
Jonathan Horne wrote:
i have a system with 4GB memory, doing the same similar behavior. but, on top
of not using the last few hundred megs of ram, even the POST shows like 3.6 or
3.7GB of ram. is PAE still a solution for my case?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$ dmesg | grep memory
real memory = 3958833
esday, April 24, 2007 11:55 AM
To: Don O'Neil
Cc: 'Andy Greenwood'; freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Memory >3.5GB not used?
In response to "Don O'Neil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I never had this problem before when I built the kernel the first time
odule from being built,
> look at the MODULES_OVERRIDE or WITHOUT_MODULES options to make.conf.
>
> man 5 make.conf for more details.
>
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Bill Moran [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 11:05 A
eil
> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
> Subject: Re: Memory >3.5GB not used?
>
> On 4/24/07, Don O'Neil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Thanks for all who pointed out the obvious PAE option...
> >
> > When I went to rebuild the kernel I got this message
;Neil
Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Memory >3.5GB not used?
On 4/24/07, Don O'Neil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thanks for all who pointed out the obvious PAE option...
>
> When I went to rebuild the kernel I got this message:
>
> +++
for more details.
-Original Message-
From: Bill Moran [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 11:05 AM
To: Don O'Neil
Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Memory >3.5GB not used?
In response to "Don O'Neil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I just buil
ginal Message-
From: Bill Moran [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 11:05 AM
To: Don O'Neil
Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Memory >3.5GB not used?
In response to "Don O'Neil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I just built a new serve
Don O'Neil wrote:
> Any reason the extra 1/2 GB isn't showing up or usable? Is there something I
> need to specify in the kernel to get to the other 1/2 GB? What if I want to
> install more than 4GB? This mobo supports up to 16 GB... Do I need to go to
> the AMD64 platform to get >4GB?
You need a
In response to "Jonathan Horne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > In response to "Don O'Neil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
> >> I just built a new server with an Athlon 64 x2, 4GB Ram and a
> >> Gigabyte/Nvidia motherboard.
> >>
> >> When I boot the system up it says on the console that 532888K will be
> >>
> In response to "Don O'Neil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>> I just built a new server with an Athlon 64 x2, 4GB Ram and a
>> Gigabyte/Nvidia motherboard.
>>
>> When I boot the system up it says on the console that 532888K will be
>> ignored.
>>
>> Of course it isn't put in any of the log files. Dmesg
In response to "Don O'Neil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I just built a new server with an Athlon 64 x2, 4GB Ram and a
> Gigabyte/Nvidia motherboard.
>
> When I boot the system up it says on the console that 532888K will be
> ignored.
>
> Of course it isn't put in any of the log files. Dmesg shows thi
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Don O'Neil
Sent: 24 avril 2007 13:56
To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Memory >3.5GB not used?
I just built a new server with an Athlon 64 x2, 4GB Ram and a
Gigabyte/Nvidia motherboard.
When I boot
42 matches
Mail list logo