> Date: Sat, Oct 24 2009 7:11 pm
> From: Len Gerstel
>
>
>
> On Oct 24, 2009, at 7:28 PM, dorayme wrote:
>
>>>
>>
>> The thiotimoline bit I understand. Translated, you are possibly
>> saying, it is logically impossible to do X. Not sure how to google
>> for why an instruction that cannot be execut
On Oct 24, 2009, at 4:28 PM, dorayme wrote:
> . Lacking a good model, I guess. Is it
> like someone falls into a sound proof black hole suddenly and cannot
> message anything?
Pretty much. The Google article about 'kernel panic' does explain
things; the idea is to stop the computer from doing
On Oct 24, 2009, at 7:28 PM, dorayme wrote:
>>
>
> The thiotimoline bit I understand. Translated, you are possibly
> saying, it is logically impossible to do X. Not sure how to google
> for why an instruction that cannot be executed makes it impossible to
> design the OS to say as much. Lacking
> TOPIC: Kernel panic? why?
> http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list/t/3f6b58de1e6e93ee?hl=en
> ==
>
>
> == 1 of 1 ==
> Date: Sat, Oct 24 2009 12:02 pm
> From: Bruce Johnson
>
> On Oct
On Oct 23, 2009, at 5:28 PM, dorayme wrote:
> But surely *just* before it does this, it knows it is going to do
> this
That would be where the thiotimoline bit comes in...google it.
--
Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group
Institutions do not ha
> Date: Thurs, Oct 22 2009 5:15 pm
> From: Bruce Johnson
>
> On Oct 22, 2009, at 2:47 PM, Jeffrey Engle wrote:
>
>> On Oct 22, 2009, at 12:51 PM, Bruce Johnson wrote:
>>
>>> If it *STILL* KP's after that, you have a hardware fault.
>>
>> I wonder when Apple will make a computer that "just tells me
On Oct 22, 2009, at 2:47 PM, Jeffrey Engle wrote:
> On Oct 22, 2009, at 12:51 PM, Bruce Johnson wrote:
>
>> If it *STILL* KP's after that, you have a hardware fault.
>
> I wonder when Apple will make a computer that "just tells me" what's
> the matter with it?
Seriously, it's because of the nat
- Original Message
> From: Jeffrey Engle
> > If it *STILL* KP's after that, you have a hardware fault.
>
> I wonder when Apple will make a computer that "just tells me" what's
> the matter with it? Or just hollers at me, "Hey, buddy! that firewire
> device you just plugged in a
On Oct 22, 2009, at 12:51 PM, Bruce Johnson wrote:
> If it *STILL* KP's after that, you have a hardware fault.
I wonder when Apple will make a computer that "just tells me" what's
the matter with it? Or just hollers at me, "Hey, buddy! that firewire
device you just plugged in ain't gonna wo
On Oct 22, 2009, at 12:51 PM, Bruce Johnson wrote:
> Uhh "C" drive?
I mean, starting it up via the super-drive and Tiger/Leopard install
disk. (holding down the C key) sorry. J
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are a member of G-Group
On Oct 22, 2009, at 11:50 AM, Jeffrey Engle wrote:
>
> Now.. after I thought I'd fixed the problem last night by
> disconnecting my firewire device, this morning... the same blue
> screen... now sometimes stupid I am, realized and thought of this
> question.. if the computer boots fine from the
On Oct 20, 2009, at 3:30 PM, Stewie de Young wrote:
> The best way is to eliminate all unknowns by removing all your
> plugged in gear - PCI cards , peripherals etc and start from a very
> basic machine.
> Then I would download and run "Memtest ".
> Problems if any with Ram modules will appea
On Oct 21, 2009, at 2:03 PM, Bruce Johnson wrote:
>
>
> I've had a rash of "weird errors with ^...@#%@$ Firewire Boxes" lately.
>
> A professor just had his Iomega external drive cause OS X to be unable
> to launch anything after it's plugged in. Weird. All the programs
> running *before* you plu
On Oct 21, 2009, at 10:34 AM, Jeffrey Engle wrote:
> After unplugging
> everything, yup, started right up fine and fast. after about two hours
> of testing, I found that the timeouts believe it or not, were coming
> from a "Speedzter 5" enclosure that I have a superdrive in. It seems
> that the
On Oct 21, 2009, at 8:57 AM, Bruce Johnson wrote:
> One-off KP's do happen, but looking at the time since the last panic
> (6 days) and the thread running (rsync) Was your mac doing a backup
> with CCC, SuperDuper or Rsync?
>
> Can you reproduce the error by running the software you were running
At 8:57 AM -0700 10/21/2009, Bruce Johnson wrote:
>On Oct 20, 2009, at 11:34 AM, Jeffrey Engle wrote:
> > Tue Oct 20 11:26:14 2009
> > BSD process name corresponding to current thread: rsync
>
>One-off KP's do happen, but looking at the time since the last panic
>(6 days) and the thread running
On Oct 21, 2009, at 8:57 AM, Bruce Johnson wrote:
>
>
> On Oct 20, 2009, at 11:34 AM, Jeffrey Engle wrote:
>
>>
>> here's the report... anybody got a clue?
>>
>> Interval Since Last Panic Report: 580133 sec
>> Panics Since Last Report: 1
>> Anonymous UUID:10C6C46F-C
On Oct 20, 2009, at 11:34 AM, Jeffrey Engle wrote:
>
> here's the report... anybody got a clue?
>
> Interval Since Last Panic Report: 580133 sec
> Panics Since Last Report: 1
> Anonymous UUID:10C6C46F-CE7C-477C-92F8-
> FC97D168236F
>
> Tue Oct 20 11:26:14 2009
>
>
until all your Ram passes.
Slowly introduce your PCI cards and peripherals back into the computer and use
it for a while to see if the problem persists.
Sometimes it is just a long process of elimination.
Stewie
From: macgu...@gmail.com
To: g3-5-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Kernel panic? why?
Dat
System Configuration
Model: PowerMac7,3, BootROM 5.2.4f1, 2 processors, PowerPC G5 (3.1),
2.3 GHz, 5 GB
Graphics: kHW_ATIrv351leItem, ATY,RV351, spdisplays_agp_device, 128 MB
Memory Module: DIMM0/J11, 1 GB, DDR SDRAM, PC3200U-30440
Memory Module: DIMM1/J12, 1 GB, DDR SDRAM, PC3200U-30440
Me
20 matches
Mail list logo