On Wed, Dec 08, 2010 at 02:37:35PM -0800, Cam Ellison wrote: > On 10-12-08 01:43 PM, Rick Moen wrote: > > Quoting Cam Ellison ([email protected]): > > > >> This is my only machine, and it's a production machine, so I'm not sure > >> about taking it out of service to run ctcs2 (thanks Rick!). > > You're very welcome. I have notes here, which I recommend, because > > Cerberus is rather peculiar software that takes a little getting used > > to, and has some quirks. > > > > 'Burn-in' on http://linuxmafia.com/kb/Hardware > > > > (We used to put all new or repaired machines at VA Linux Systems through > > at least 48 hours of Cerberus / ctcs testing, to catch problems.) > > > > That looks very useful. I'll give it a try. > > On another list that I frequent, the two responses thus far both > suggested replacing or swapping out the PS. I have to admit the idea > has merit, though it's an Antec Signature 650, came new with the rest of > the system, and over $200 here including the taxes. I'm a little leery > of ending up with a good, but effectively useless, PS. Which leads to > another question: how do you test a PS? Is it possible?
The burn in process would probably reveal the fault, as it will load the machine using more power and creating heat. -- Brian Lavender http://www.brie.com/brian/ "Program testing can be used to show the presence of bugs, but never to show their absence!" Professor Edsger Dijkstra 1972 Turing award recipient _______________________________________________ vox-tech mailing list [email protected] http://lists.lugod.org/mailman/listinfo/vox-tech
