Le 02.12.2014 19:27, tv.deb...@googlemail.com a écrit :
On 02/12/2014 20:48, berenger.mo...@neutralite.org wrote:
[cut]
Also, what is EBR (or EPBR, which seems to be some sort of enhanced
whatever may be a EBR)?
Extended Boot Record on DOS disks ? Where information about extended
partition
Le 20.11.2014 22:26, Scott Ferguson a écrit :
On 21/11/14 06:45, Pascal Hambourg wrote:
Scott Ferguson a écrit :
Might be worth fscking the disk first in case that's where the
problem lies.
Why ? fsck works on filesystems, not disks or partition tables.
Good question - because I didn't
On 02/12/2014 20:48, berenger.mo...@neutralite.org wrote:
[cut]
Also, what is EBR (or EPBR, which seems to be some sort of enhanced
whatever may be a EBR)?
Extended Boot Record on DOS disks ? Where information about extended
partition is stored.
Le Mon, 17 Nov 2014 16:56:51 +0100,
berenger.mo...@neutralite.org a écrit :
Now, fact is that the hard-disk partition table is no longer correct,
and when I plug it (it is an USB HD) into a Debian system, it makes
udev eating all my memory, and more.
Could you please open a bugreport against
Scott Ferguson a écrit :
On 20/11/14 12:45, Martin Read wrote:
On 20/11/14 01:03, Scott Ferguson wrote:
On 20/11/14 04:06, Morel Bérenger wrote:
I think it's msdos.
AFAIK mdos partition tables don't support anywhere near that number of
slices. :(
MS-DOS partition tables support any number
On 20/11/14 20:13, Pascal Hambourg wrote:
Scott Ferguson a écrit :
On 20/11/14 12:45, Martin Read wrote:
On 20/11/14 01:03, Scott Ferguson wrote:
On 20/11/14 04:06, Morel Bérenger wrote:
I think it's msdos.
AFAIK mdos partition tables don't support anywhere near that number of
slices. :(
Scott Ferguson a écrit :
Might be worth fscking the disk first in case that's where the problem lies.
Why ? fsck works on filesystems, not disks or partition tables.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact
On 21/11/14 06:45, Pascal Hambourg wrote:
Scott Ferguson a écrit :
Might be worth fscking the disk first in case that's where the problem lies.
Why ? fsck works on filesystems, not disks or partition tables.
Good question - because I didn't spend much time thinking about it, or,
because I
Le Lun 17 novembre 2014 19:32, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh a écrit :
On Mon, 17 Nov 2014, berenger.mo...@neutralite.org wrote:
So, what part of that disk should I extract, which could be usable
and sharable? Partition table, of course, which is probably at disk's
beginning, but how long might
On 20/11/14 04:06, Morel Bérenger wrote:
Le Lun 17 novembre 2014 19:32, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh a écrit :
On Mon, 17 Nov 2014, berenger.mo...@neutralite.org wrote:
So, what part of that disk should I extract, which could be usable
and sharable? Partition table, of course, which is
Le Mer 19 novembre 2014 21:16, Scott Ferguson a écrit :
On 20/11/14 04:06, Morel Bérenger wrote:
Le Lun 17 novembre 2014 19:32, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh a écrit :
On Mon, 17 Nov 2014, berenger.mo...@neutralite.org wrote:
So, what part of that disk should I extract, which could be
On 20/11/14 11:14, Morel Bérenger wrote:
Le Mer 19 novembre 2014 21:16, Scott Ferguson a écrit :
On 20/11/14 04:06, Morel Bérenger wrote:
Le Lun 17 novembre 2014 19:32, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh a écrit :
On Mon, 17 Nov 2014, berenger.mo...@neutralite.org wrote:
So, what part of that
On 20/11/14 01:03, Scott Ferguson wrote:
On 20/11/14 04:06, Morel Bérenger wrote:
I think it's msdos.
AFAIK mdos partition tables don't support anywhere near that number of
slices. :(
MSDOS extended partitions contain a linked list of logical partitions.
It looks, from the pattern of
On 20/11/14 12:45, Martin Read wrote:
On 20/11/14 01:03, Scott Ferguson wrote:
On 20/11/14 04:06, Morel Bérenger wrote:
I think it's msdos.
AFAIK mdos partition tables don't support anywhere near that number of
slices. :(
MSDOS extended partitions contain a linked list of logical
Hello.
I think most of my problem's description is in title, but here are some
more informations.
I have a hard disk on which I tried a... quite unusual... procedure to
install another OS. My try in this procedure [1] did not went well at
all, but it's not the subject of this mail.
Now,
On Mon, 17 Nov 2014, berenger.mo...@neutralite.org wrote:
Now, fact is that the hard-disk partition table is no longer
correct, and when I plug it (it is an USB HD) into a Debian system,
it makes udev eating all my memory, and more.
Please image the partition table so that someone can
Le 17.11.2014 17:55, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh a écrit :
On Mon, 17 Nov 2014, berenger.mo...@neutralite.org wrote:
Now, fact is that the hard-disk partition table is no longer
correct, and when I plug it (it is an USB HD) into a Debian system,
it makes udev eating all my memory, and more.
On Mon, 17 Nov 2014, berenger.mo...@neutralite.org wrote:
So, what part of that disk should I extract, which could be usable
and sharable? Partition table, of course, which is probably at
disk's beginning, but how long might it be?
That depends. What kind of partition table?
--
One disk
Douglas A. Tutty wrote:
The only add-ons I have are from debian packages. Even without addons I
get memory leaks.
Doug.
I'm using firefox 2.0.0.14 with few standard plugins and add-ons
in top
PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEMTIME+ COMMAND
20 0 142m 43m 18m S0 2.2
Ken Teague wrote:
Douglas A. Tutty wrote:
Well, there are already many memory-related bugs. See esp 452706. The
complainer was running out with more than 1 GB of memory. The suggested
action was to try FF3 in experimental.
Ouch. That has to be the poorest answer I've ever seen from a
On Sat Jan 3 14:20 , Kamaraju S Kusumanchi sent:
I think the maintainer is just trying to find the cause of the memory build
up. He is trying to narrow down the problem. He is not suggesting shifting
stable users to experimental as a long term solution. Conside for example,
another user
On Wed,31.Dec.08, 17:22:55, Ken Teague wrote:
Douglas A. Tutty wrote:
Well, there are already many memory-related bugs. See esp 452706. The
complainer was running out with more than 1 GB of memory. The suggested
action was to try FF3 in experimental.
Ouch. That has to be the
On 2008-12-31 16:48:59 +0100, Javier Barroso wrote:
Read http://support.mozilla.com/es/kb/High+memory+usage for memory
tips in firefox/iceweasel.
Thanks! FYI, the only plugin I use is the Flash plugin (provided
by mozilla-plugin-gnash since this is a PowerPC machine).
I've also looked at
On 2008-12-31 09:46:28 -0500, Douglas A. Tutty wrote:
Since iceweasel went with GTK-2.0 (along with other gtk apps), the
memory hogging difference between GTK and KDE has pretty much gone out
the window.
I've said *disk* space (my machine is a 8-year-old PowerBook with not
much disk space).
On Thu, Jan 01, 2009 at 02:26:33PM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
On 2008-12-31 16:48:59 +0100, Javier Barroso wrote:
Read http://support.mozilla.com/es/kb/High+memory+usage for memory
tips in firefox/iceweasel.
Also I'm seeing this problem:
Firefox's memory usage may increase if
On 2008-12-31 17:22:55 -0800, Ken Teague wrote:
Ouch. That has to be the poorest answer I've ever seen from a Debian
developer... ever. In bugs I've submitted and seen submitted, the
developer would either take the issue up with upstream or fix the
problem themselves. I think it isn't right
On 2009-01-01 08:53:24 -0500, Douglas A. Tutty wrote:
Firefox's memory usage may increase if it's left open for long
periods of time. A workaround for this is to periodically restart
Firefox.
Isn't this close to the definition of a memory leak? Of course,
long periods of time
On 01/01/09 11:11, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
On 2009-01-01 08:53:24 -0500, Douglas A. Tutty wrote:
Firefox's memory usage may increase if it's left open for long
periods of time. A workaround for this is to periodically restart
Firefox.
Isn't this close to the definition of a memory leak?
On 2009-01-01 14:26:33 +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
I've also looked at about:cache (I didn't know that). It says:
Memory cache device
Number of entries:540
Maximum storage size: 9216 KiB
Storage in use: 32633 KiB
Inactive storage: 0 KiB
I don't understand why
On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 02:00:26PM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
On 2008-12-29 20:28:45 -0500, Douglas A. Tutty wrote:
I use Konqueror instead of Iceweasel whenever I can because of the memory
I wouldn't use konqueror or anything using KDE libs. To a less extent,
ditto for some
On Wed December 31 2008, Douglas A. Tutty wrote:
Since iceweasel went with GTK-2.0 (along with other gtk apps), the
memory hogging difference between GTK and KDE has pretty much gone out
the window. Then when you add the memory leak in the GTK on Etch it
becomes more memory efficient to use
On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 2:00 PM, Vincent Lefevre vinc...@vinc17.org wrote:
I use Firefox mainly because of the Tab Mix Plus, Link Widgets (but all
browsers should have that by default: link has been standard HTML for
a long time), Flashblock, Stylish and Greasemonkey extensions, and some
On Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 10:15:13AM -0500, Paul Cartwright wrote:
On Wed December 31 2008, Douglas A. Tutty wrote:
Since iceweasel went with GTK-2.0 (along with other gtk apps), the
memory hogging difference between GTK and KDE has pretty much gone out
the window. ?Then when you add the
Now, when I quit Firefox/Iceweasel and restart it (with the entire
session restored), I find that it takes significantly less memory.
Probable memory leaks?
Even this link by one poster suggests users to restart the browser
periodically via session restore.
Koh Choon Lin wrote:
Now, when I quit Firefox/Iceweasel and restart it (with the entire
session restored), I find that it takes significantly less memory.
Probable memory leaks?
Even this link by one poster suggests users to restart the browser
periodically via session restore.
Most memory leaks in Firefox are due to faulty code in add-ons. I had
this problem a while back, sometimes due to Firefox, other times due to
add-ons. The link you provided was one I referenced while having these
problems and, after looking at the list of affected add-ons, I removed
or
Koh Choon Lin wrote:
I run Icecat with no addon but this problem persists ~ 500 MiB for
browsing web forums after 30 mins. Switching to other browsers helps
to reduce my system load.
That most likely is a memory leak with the application. You should
submit a bug report on it.
- Ken
--
To
On Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 10:44:32AM -0800, Ken Teague wrote:
Most memory leaks in Firefox are due to faulty code in add-ons. I had
this problem a while back, sometimes due to Firefox, other times due to
add-ons. The link you provided was one I referenced while having these
problems and,
Douglas A. Tutty wrote:
The only add-ons I have are from debian packages. Even without addons I
get memory leaks.
Report the bug. These things don't get fixed until they're addressed.
- Ken
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe.
On Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 03:21:02PM -0800, Ken Teague wrote:
Douglas A. Tutty wrote:
The only add-ons I have are from debian packages. Even without addons I
get memory leaks.
Report the bug. These things don't get fixed until they're addressed.
Well, there are already many
On Wed, 31 Dec 2008 18:41:49 -0500
Douglas A. Tutty dtu...@vianet.ca wrote:
Note also that the description of iceweasel is that it is lightweight.
Well, I think this can be removed since Iceweasel/Firefox isn't
lightweight anymore.
Cheers,
Frank
--
http://frank.uvena.de/en/
On Thu, 2009-01-01 at 01:13 +0100, Frank Lanitz wrote:
On Wed, 31 Dec 2008 18:41:49 -0500
Douglas A. Tutty dtu...@vianet.ca wrote:
Note also that the description of iceweasel is that it is lightweight.
Well, I think this can be removed since Iceweasel/Firefox isn't
lightweight anymore.
On Wed, 31 Dec 2008 18:22:29 -0600
lostson lost...@lostsonsvault.org wrote:
On Thu, 2009-01-01 at 01:13 +0100, Frank Lanitz wrote:
On Wed, 31 Dec 2008 18:41:49 -0500
Douglas A. Tutty dtu...@vianet.ca wrote:
Note also that the description of iceweasel is that it is
lightweight.
On Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 06:22:29PM -0600, lostson wrote:
On Thu, 2009-01-01 at 01:13 +0100, Frank Lanitz wrote:
On Wed, 31 Dec 2008 18:41:49 -0500
Douglas A. Tutty dtu...@vianet.ca wrote:
Note also that the description of iceweasel is that it is lightweight.
Well, I think this can
On 12/31/08 17:41, Douglas A. Tutty wrote:
On Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 03:21:02PM -0800, Ken Teague wrote:
Douglas A. Tutty wrote:
The only add-ons I have are from debian packages. Even without addons I
get memory leaks.
Report the bug. These things don't get fixed until they're addressed.
Douglas A. Tutty wrote:
Well, there are already many memory-related bugs. See esp 452706. The
complainer was running out with more than 1 GB of memory. The suggested
action was to try FF3 in experimental.
Ouch. That has to be the poorest answer I've ever seen from a Debian
developer...
On Wednesday 2008 December 31 19:06:39 Ron Johnson wrote:
On 12/31/08 17:41, Douglas A. Tutty wrote:
On Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 03:21:02PM -0800, Ken Teague wrote:
Douglas A. Tutty wrote:
The only add-ons I have are from debian packages. Even without
addons I
get memory leaks.
On 2008-12-29 20:28:45 -0500, Douglas A. Tutty wrote:
I use Konqueror instead of Iceweasel whenever I can because of the memory
I wouldn't use konqueror or anything using KDE libs. To a less extent,
ditto for some GNOME-related packages (e.g. I don't want to install
the huge package
On Sat, Dec 27, 2008 at 09:35:40PM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
On 2008-12-27 11:02:41 -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
True enough. But, sometimes, throwing h/w at an issue does actually
solve (or, at least, hide) the problem. :)
I use several very different machines, such as a personal
I wonder why so much memory is used and my machine keeps on swapping.
I don't have many applications: iceweasel, liferea, a few xterm's, and
some small background processes.
Here's an output of htop several minutes after quitting iceweasel (it's
still running to do some clean up, I suppose).
Vincent Lefevre wrote:
I wonder why so much memory is used and my machine keeps on swapping.
I don't have many applications: iceweasel, liferea, a few xterm's, and
some small background processes.
[snip]
Once iceweasel has really quit, everything is back to normal:
CPU[||
On 2008-12-27 15:36:38 +0200, Eugene V. Lyubimkin wrote:
You already have an answer: iceweasel eats large amounts memory. You
already have 'MEM: 62%' at iceweasel only in real memory, it seems
it also use some swap on your machine.
OK. I suppose that there's some bug (bad design or whatever)
On 12/27/08 06:59, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
I wonder why so much memory is used and my machine keeps on swapping.
I don't have many applications: iceweasel, liferea, a few xterm's, and
some small background processes.
Here's an output of htop several minutes after quitting iceweasel (it's
still
On 2008-12-27 16:00 +0100, Ron Johnson wrote:
On 12/27/08 06:59, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
I wonder why so much memory is used and my machine keeps on swapping.
I don't have many applications: iceweasel, liferea, a few xterm's, and
some small background processes.
Here's an output of htop
On 2008-12-27 09:00:57 -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
On 12/27/08 06:59, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
Here's an output of htop several minutes after quitting iceweasel (it's
still running to do some clean up, I suppose). Below, the processes are
sorted by MEM%, but none of them are taking more that 4%
On 2008-12-27 16:07:04 +0100, Sven Joachim wrote:
Are you sure? I also see several firefox-bin processes, but they only
show up in pstree or htop, not in top.
They can also be shown in top after typing H.
--
Vincent Lefèvre vinc...@vinc17.org - Web: http://www.vinc17.org/
100% accessible
On 12/27/08 09:42, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
[snip]
Note: I plan to replace it, but inefficient software will remain
inefficient.
True enough. But, sometimes, throwing h/w at an issue does actually
solve (or, at least, hide) the problem. :)
--
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson LA USA
I like my
On Sat, Dec 27, 2008 at 04:46:54PM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
On 2008-12-27 16:07:04 +0100, Sven Joachim wrote:
Are you sure? I also see several firefox-bin processes, but they only
show up in pstree or htop, not in top.
They can also be shown in top after typing H.
In which case,
On 2008-12-27 11:02:41 -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
True enough. But, sometimes, throwing h/w at an issue does actually
solve (or, at least, hide) the problem. :)
I use several very different machines, such as a personal machine
with 2 GB, a computation server with 32 GB, and an Internet
On Sat, 2008.12.27, 362, Eugene V. Lyubimkin wrote:
Vincent Lefevre wrote:
I wonder why so much memory is used and my machine keeps on swapping.
I don't have many applications: iceweasel, liferea, a few xterm's, and
some small background processes.
[snip]
Once iceweasel has really quit,
On Sat, 2008-12-27 at 17:38 -0600, green wrote:
On Sat, 2008.12.27, 362, Eugene V. Lyubimkin wrote:
Vincent Lefevre wrote:
I wonder why so much memory is used and my machine keeps on swapping.
I don't have many applications: iceweasel, liferea, a few xterm's, and
some small
On 2008-12-27 17:38:03 -0600, green wrote:
I think firefox/iceweasel simply uses hideous amounts of memory. It
seems like galeon also uses lots of memory. Could this be because of
the Gecko rendering engine?
The default browser used on Nokia's Internet Tablets is based on
Gecko and doesn't
On Sat, Dec 27, 2008 at 05:38:03PM -0600, green wrote:
I think firefox/iceweasel simply uses hideous amounts of memory. It seems
like
galeon also uses lots of memory. Could this be because of the Gecko
rendering
engine?
Which version are we talking about? Etch (IceWeasel 2.0, Geck
On 2008-12-28 01:50:35 +, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
Which version are we talking about? Etch (IceWeasel 2.0, Geck 1.8, IIRC)
or Lenny (IceWeasel 3.0, Gecko 1.9 IIRC).
The version in Etch leaks memory badly. The version in Lenny behaves
better.
In my case, Lenny.
--
Vincent Lefèvre
I've started to have a problem of my computer running out of memory. It's on
a work computer and it happens during the middle of the night so I'm not here
actively doing anything. The machine has 256MB of RAM and 517MB of swap
space.
In the morning, several of the programs I left running the
El Tue, 9 Sep 2003 09:33:52 -0700 Kurt Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió:
USER PID %CPU %MEM VSZ RSS TTY STAT START TIME COMMAND
root 368 41.1 67.8 519176 174292 ? D13:47 218:35
/usr/X11R6/bin/X :0 -dpi 100 -nolisten tcp vt7 -auth /var/lib/kdm/A:0-0B9JDi
kurt
On Tuesday 09 September 2003 11:05 am, Diego Calleja García wrote:
El Tue, 9 Sep 2003 09:33:52 -0700 Kurt Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]
escribió:
USER PID %CPU %MEM VSZ RSS TTY STAT START TIME COMMAND
root 368 41.1 67.8 519176 174292 ? D13:47 218:35
Hallo zusammen,
ich habe, seit ich gestern von Lilo auf Grub wechseln wollte um mein
Notebook zu starten (Grub lief dort schoneinmal) nach einer korrekten
Installation folgendes Problem:
Egal welchen Eintrag ich auswaehle aus dem Grubmenu beim Boot (Neuer
Kernel, alter Kernel [beide
Hallo,
Kommando zurueck, ich habe zum Test einfach mal Grub von Knoppix aus
installiert, nun geht's.
Stellt sich immer noch die Verstaendnisfrage.
Trotzdem danke fuers Zuhoeren ;)
Malte Giere
--
Haeufig gestellte Fragen und Antworten (FAQ):
http://www.de.debian.org/debian-user-german-FAQ/
Hallo Malte,
* Malte Giere [EMAIL PROTECTED] [14-07-03 13:13]:
Und eine Verstaendnisfrage:
Was genau ist ein vmlinuz? Ich habe immer nur mit bzImages gearbeitet,
wie unterscheiden sie sich?+
Der Name ist anders, sonst sollte das bei den neuen Kerneln kein
Unterschied mehr sein.
--
Gruss
I recall seeing somewhere on my machine recently a document that
detailed the Debian setup of ipchains. Now I am attempting to set up
ipchains and I can't find it. I know about man, apropos, locate, etc,
etc, but I must not be remembering the magic n-letter string that all
gurus know to use. What
On Mon, Dec 10, 2001 at 10:36:10PM -0800, Paul Condon wrote:
I recall seeing somewhere on my machine recently a document that
detailed the Debian setup of ipchains. Now I am attempting to set up
ipchains and I can't find it. I know about man, apropos, locate, etc,
...
# apt-get install ipmasq
hi ya paul
on your deb box...
debian:/usr/doc/netbase/ipchains*
ipchains config and examples..
http://www.Linux-Sec.net/Firewall/
the only one that is debian specific that is noted is
http://www.debiandiary.f2s.com/files/iptables.sh
have fun linuxing
alvin
http://www.Linux-1U.net ...
On Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 11:47:57AM +0200, Marc Leeman wrote:
The problem: When I am starting my X server with the nvidia module (not
nv, there I have no problem), I get a green rectangle on my screen. It
covers everything at that place except my mouse cursor. I log in (KDE
2.1.1) and start
Hello,
I've got some weird problem, I don't seem to find a solution for. I'll try
to situate it and explain the things I've done to try and find out what
the problem might have been.
A couple weeks ago, I changed from SuSE (which I liked btw) to Debian. I
especially wanted to do this to
|--STUFF SNIPPED|
Marc Leeman wrote:
some info:
P III 550
Diamond Viper 770 Ultra
512 Mb RAM (2x 128 Mb pc100 and 1x 256 Mb pc133)
XFree86 4.0.3 (not debian)
SDL 1.2.0
avifile 0.53.5
KDE 2.1.1 (but I also have it in the XDM login screen or
some info:
P III 550
Diamond Viper 770 Ultra
512 Mb RAM (2x 128 Mb pc100 and 1x 256 Mb pc133)
XFree86 4.0.3 (not debian)
SDL 1.2.0
avifile 0.53.5
KDE 2.1.1 (but I also have it in the XDM login screen or with startx, so
this is not a problem).
Did you configure KDE to
|--STUFF SNIPPED|
No, it asks it, but I really don't think it has anything to do with the
windowmanager, since it's there using XDM (before logging in to KDE, but
I'll check your suggestion and see if makes any difference).
On Tue, Jan 23, 2001, brian moore wrote:
6:13pm up 20 min, 2 users, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00
27 processes: 26 sleeping, 1 running, 0 zombie, 0 stopped
CPU states: 0.1% user, 0.1% system, 0.0% nice, 99.6% idle
Mem: 517500K av, 49412K used, 468088K free, 14644K shrd, 22516K
I have played around and it seems to be more of an issue with the
system itself. I am running 2.2r2 with kernel 2.2.18. This is a
failrly newly installed system, and what happens is that applications
don't release memory when they are done. I thought it was specific to
Webtrends Enterprise
If it helps, here is the top readout. There really is not much
running:
6:13pm up 20 min, 2 users, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00
27 processes: 26 sleeping, 1 running, 0 zombie, 0 stopped
CPU states: 0.1% user, 0.1% system, 0.0% nice, 99.6% idle
Mem: 517500K av, 49412K used, 468088K
If there were a FAQ for this list (is there?), this would be the first
question in it.
Ken Weingold wrote:
what happens is that applications
don't release memory when they are done.
Ken Weingold also wrote:
6:13pm up 20 min, 2 users, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00
27 processes: 26
On Tue, Jan 23, 2001 at 06:15:48PM -0500, Ken Weingold wrote:
If it helps, here is the top readout. There really is not much
running:
6:13pm up 20 min, 2 users, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00
27 processes: 26 sleeping, 1 running, 0 zombie, 0 stopped
CPU states: 0.1% user, 0.1%
under top, look at how much of that memory is marked as cached. Linux
caches filesystem accesses in memory to speed up access for commonly
requested files. This is normal, and if some actual process needs memory,
the kernel will give up some of its cache space.
-casey
On Tue, 23 Jan 2001, Ken
Matthew Dalton wrote:
Mem: 517500K av, 49412K used, 468088K free, 14644K shrd, 22516K buff
^^^
There's your 'free' memory.
Line wrapping killed the meaning...
22516K buff - that's the bit I meant... :/
^^^
Hi all! We're having a problem with memory here in a client's machine.
The computer is a PIII-750 with 512MB RAM running resin 2.13 and IBM JDK
1.2.2. This is a game server (the
client is a game site).
Up to 15 days before, this server had 256 MB and could stand up to 450
players simultaneously;
Cesar Cardoso wrote:
Sometimes, when resin freezes, trial of working with server gives a
message looking like bash:all resources unavailable
fork:
message is probably:
fork(): resource temporarily unavailable
right ? :)
check ulimits, (ulimit -a) increase the limits for memory (ulimit -m)
@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: resin, IBM JDK and memory problem
X-Mailing-List: debian-user@lists.debian.org archive/latest/121685
Cesar Cardoso wrote:
Sometimes, when resin freezes, trial of working with server gives a
message looking like bash:all resources unavailable
fork:
message
i have installed debian potato with kernel 2.2.17
on a amd-k6 500 with VIA VT82C5 Apollo Chipset
the bios recognizes the total of 128MB ram, but debian only uses 64MB - any
hints?
thanks Michael
Hi,
On Mon, 13 Nov 2000, [iso-8859-1] Michael Bürkle wrote:
i have installed debian potato with kernel 2.2.17
on a amd-k6 500 with VIA VT82C5 Apollo Chipset
the bios recognizes the total of 128MB ram, but debian only uses 64MB - any
hints?
put 'mem=128M' in lilo.conf somewhere. I do not
]
Sent: Monday, November 13, 2000 6:13 AM
To: Michael Burkle
Cc: debian
Subject: Re: memory problem
Hi,
On Mon, 13 Nov 2000, [iso-8859-1] Michael B|rkle wrote:
i have installed debian potato with kernel 2.2.17
on a amd-k6 500 with VIA VT82C5 Apollo Chipset
the bios recognizes the total
Hello Ralph,
Ok, first the preferred language in this list is English, not
German.
Ok, I will do so.
Altho his machine has 128 megs of RAM, he can only see 64 megs.
The solution is to include the following command in your lilo.conf
and re- run lilo:
append=mem=128M
(note the
Hello Ralph,
Ok, first the preferred language in this list is English, not
German.
Ok, I will do so.
Altho his machine has 128 megs of RAM, he can only see 64 megs.
The solution is to include the following command in your lilo.conf
and re- run lilo:
append=mem=128M
Thomas Wild said:
Altho his machine has 128 megs of RAM, he can only see 64 megs.
The solution is to include the following command in your lilo.conf
and re- run lilo:
append=mem=128M
(note the capital M!)
I did. I wrote it under Image . But when I reboot the maschine, it
Thanks for yours help.
I tested an other RAM and it works. So it seems,
that the RAM-Module is defect.
Shit happens !
Mit freundlichen Gruessen
Thomas Wild
|
InTeCoFix GbR
Kirchhofstrasse 107 Technischer Support:
42327
Hai,
I have been working with debian 2.1 for almost one year
now in a productive environent and I'm real happy with it!
(running samba/qpopper/roxen http server/imp (web
mail)/sendmail/ and some other stuff).
In my new PC at home I have 64Mb of memory but only 16Mb
is seen by the kernel. I
MKIn my new PC at home I have 64Mb of memory but only 16Mb
MKis seen by the kernel. I alreadu tried 'append=mem=64Mb
MKin my lilo.conf file but then my system craches (havy) after
MKseveral minutes, a reboot will give me a kernel panic
MKat boot time (first time I have seen one!)
MKMy PowerEdge
This is a long shot but did you recently compile your kernel? There is
a place where you can select something about 16mb of memory. Maybe a
coincidence maybe not.
hth.
kent
Hai,
I have been working with debian 2.1 for almost one year
now in a productive environent and I'm real happy with it!
Perhaps your BIOS is set for a 1MB memory hole? Maybe some of the memory chips
not working? What are the BIOS boot reports? What DOS/Windows report ?
Hai,
I have been working with debian 2.1 for almost one year
now in a productive environent and I'm real happy with it!
(running
Shaul Karl [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Perhaps your BIOS is set for a 1MB memory hole? Maybe some of the
memory chips not working? What are the BIOS boot reports? What
DOS/Windows report ?
Hai,
I have been working with debian 2.1 for almost one year
now in a productive
1 - 100 of 124 matches
Mail list logo
