>
> Checking the status page, we seem to be stuck on 26 exponents between
> 6,325,000 and 6,972,593 - that haven't had one LL test. I've been double
> checking exponents in this range for months (and getting them done at the
> rate of more than 1 per month). I've been double checking because that is
> "work makes the most sense", but does it make sense to double check this
> range when there are untested ones? If these 26 were actually being
> tested, they would be knocked off at the rate of at least one per day, and
> it has been a while since one has been finished.
Haven't we had enough discussions about taking bnumbers people are takingf
a long time to test / not chexcking uin very often? :)
Chris
>
>
>
>
> +------------------------------------+
> | Jud McCranie |
> | |
> | former temporary part-time adjunct |
> | instructor of a minor university |
> +------------------------------------+
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm
> Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
>
_________________________________________________________________________
Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm
Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
