In current cooker (and for several days now), booting isolinux to do a
hard drive install fails on my notebook. You go through specifying the
drive location, get "second stage" and "probing serial ports", several
lines of stuff that flies by too fast to read, and the a dead black screen.
A har
Borsenkow Andrej wrote:
>>There is another program, cpuburn, that help to found that kind of
>>problems, it executes secuences of instructions that are known to heat
>>the CPU. I don't remind the URL, but goople should help you.
>>
>
>Google?!
>
>[root@cooker root]# urpmq -r cpuburn
>cpuburn-1.4
>
> There is another program, cpuburn, that help to found that kind of
> problems, it executes secuences of instructions that are known to heat
> the CPU. I don't remind the URL, but goople should help you.
>
Google?!
[root@cooker root]# urpmq -r cpuburn
cpuburn-1.4-1mdk
-andrej
> "guillaume" == Guillaume Cottenceau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
guillaume> Paolo Pedroni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Il 12:43, martedì 30 ottobre 2001, hai scritto:
>>
>> > Do you use it often? Did it allow you to detect memory problems in the
>> > real world?
>>
>> I detected memory p
On Tuesday 30 October 2001 03:10 pm, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
> Tom Brinkman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >cpuburn http://users.ev1.net/~redelm/severely tests
>
> This looks interesting; I'm thinking of puting that in the rescue;
> what would you advice? What's the procedure? Fork, l
On Tuesday 30 October 2001 05:18 pm, Yura Gusev wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Oct 2001, Tom Brinkman wrote:
> >cpuburn http://users.ev1.net/~redelm/severely tests
> > cpu/cache/ram. As a long time overclocker, I can say if your
> > system can run cpuburn for at least 30 mins, it's stable as can
>
On Tue, 30 Oct 2001, Tom Brinkman wrote:
>cpuburn http://users.ev1.net/~redelm/severely tests
> cpu/cache/ram. As a long time overclocker, I can say if your system
> can run cpuburn for at least 30 mins, it's stable as can be. Quicker
You know the risk of overclocing but you can't pr
On 30 Oct 2001, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
> Todd Lyons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I think this would be a VERY good thing (provided there's not a major
> > technical showstopper with memtest-x86, which is what I'm afraid of).
>
> Do you use it often? Did it allow you to detect memory pro
Ainsi parlait Guillaume Cottenceau :
> > BTW, thanks Guillaume for your Penguin Liberation rpms ;)
>
> As Blue told it, you're mixing the Guillaume's :-).
I'm the only real one, gc is a vile usurpator :-)
--
Guillaume Rousse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GPG key http://lis.snv.jussieu.fr/~rousse/gpgkey.h
Tom Brinkman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>cpuburn http://users.ev1.net/~redelm/severely tests
This looks interesting; I'm thinking of puting that in the rescue; what
would you advice? What's the procedure? Fork, launch the "burn*" program
and monitor the process? It seems that burnBX
Tom Brinkman wrote:
>On Tuesday 30 October 2001 11:11 am, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
>
>>Paolo Pedroni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>>>I detected memory problems at least three times, using memtest.
>>>It just works! Now, everytime some friend of mine asks me to
>>>check their malfunctioning c
On Tuesday 30 October 2001 11:11 am, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
> Paolo Pedroni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I detected memory problems at least three times, using memtest.
> > It just works! Now, everytime some friend of mine asks me to
> > check their malfunctioning computer, first thing I d
Paolo Pedroni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Il 12:43, martedì 30 ottobre 2001, hai scritto:
>
> > Do you use it often? Did it allow you to detect memory problems in the
> > real world?
>
> I detected memory problems at least three times, using memtest. It just works!
> Now, everytime some frien
Il 12:43, martedì 30 ottobre 2001, hai scritto:
> Do you use it often? Did it allow you to detect memory problems in the
> real world?
I detected memory problems at least three times, using memtest. It just works!
Now, everytime some friend of mine asks me to check their malfunctioning
computer
On Mon Oct 29, 2001 at 08:47:20PM -0800, Todd Lyons wrote:
> If isolinux is kept for 8.2, what's keeping you from also allowing it to
> boot memtest-x86? It would be an awesome thing to be able to tell
> users "it sounds like you've got hardware problems, boot CD 2 and select
> memtest". Compar
If isolinux is kept for 8.2, what's keeping you from also allowing it to
boot memtest-x86? It would be an awesome thing to be able to tell
users "it sounds like you've got hardware problems, boot CD 2 and select
memtest". Compare that to "go to /images on CD1, find memtest-x86.bin,
make a boot
16 matches
Mail list logo
