Re: Cheap DDR3 memory

[George Toft via PLUG-discuss]

Prefer cans :)

taking conversation offline...

Regards,

George Toft

On 3/5/2021 5:07 PM, Matt Graham via PLUG-discuss wrote:

On 2021-03-04 21:05, George Toft via PLUG-discuss wrote:

I have 12 pieces of 4GB DDR3.
Can it find a home?  Will trade for Guinness.


I could use 2 pieces of 4G DDR3, but I will not be able to go pick up 
any Guinness until tomorrow.  Would sir prefer cans, bottles, a mini 
keg, or extra stout?



---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: Cheap DDR3 memory

[Matt Graham via PLUG-discuss]

On 2021-03-04 21:05, George Toft via PLUG-discuss wrote:

I have 12 pieces of 4GB DDR3.
Can it find a home?  Will trade for Guinness.


I could use 2 pieces of 4G DDR3, but I will not be able to go pick up 
any Guinness until tomorrow.  Would sir prefer cans, bottles, a mini 
keg, or extra stout?


--
Crow202 Blog: http://crow202.org/wordpress
There is no Darkness in Eternity
But only Light too dim for us to see.
---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: Cheap DDR3 memory

[Stephen Partington via PLUG-discuss]

Just ddr3 no reg/ecc?

On Thu, Mar 4, 2021, 9:26 PM George Toft via PLUG-discuss <
plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote:

> I have 12 pieces of 4GB DDR3 and 4 pieces of 2GB DDR3.  Stripped out of
> a Penguin Computing box.
>
> Can it find a home?  Will trade for Guinness.
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> George Toft
>
> ---
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: Question about memory for a Dell

[Stephen Partington via PLUG-discuss]

I cannot disagree with any of that. I was not in a position to wait for a
ryzen+High end GPU so I still have an intel i9 and Nvidia laptop. I ended
up getting one of the 10th gen intel ThinkPad t15g and I have to say I am
quite happy with it among laptops. Finding a laptop with 4 SODIMM slots and
a modular discrete GPUI challenging for less than 4K is a bit challenging.

I have been without a proper desktop for 3 years now and I am missing it
but it is not quite as painful yet. I do find it interesting that chromeOS
is absorbing the android tablet space and that combined with the ability to
get to the Linux shell underneath.

the issue with android tablets and MOST Chromebooks is that they are cut
down to the least possible cost so the ram/CPU combination is so
dramatically underpowered they are just shy of useless. For example, the
first-gen Samsung Chromebook plus with their Exynos CPU and 4GB ram was
just very pretty and more cumbersome to use than my phone. And I think that
is going to be the issue with any robust ARM computing. AMD has some
interesting ideas in play that I am kind of excited to see what they do
with it.

On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 1:45 PM Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss <
plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote:

> Most everything I've seen around the M1 chip come across hacker-news
> (can't watch Linus Tech Tips and not get annoyed by his O-face anymore) say
> it's heavily software dependent, which great, macos supports, linux if/when
> supported probably won't, but as usually apple optimizes their os around
> their hardware quite specifically.  Some testing of windoze arm has even
> said it runs better on M1 hardware than microsoft arm surface hardware too,
> so who knows, but I suspect raw linux would run like ass if/when getting to
> work finally.  If more arm vendors follow suit, perhaps, but until then
> apple hardware will be another walled garden beholden to their os alone.
>
> I've looked for years to get some hardware such as a tablet or other
> thin-ish hardware device to be a go-between between my human interface and
> my hardware systems, but I've never found a substitute for just being able
> to run different OS's and things on hardware as slim as my laptops.
> Android tablets are mostly useless, ipads marginally better, but still
> nothing replaces a native hardware pc solution, where simply I need
> cpu+memory+disk, and lots of it.  I'll never get that from arm boxes I
> think.
>
> My next laptop will likely be a ryzen/threadripper setup and a real gpu.
> Intel+nvidia with prime has been an abortion from go some 10 years ago,
> can't get worse, but buying an 8/16gb fixed (ie. soldered memory) mac with
> an arm proc/gpu will likely never satiate my need even in a laptop with
> constantly running separate windows/linux vm's constantly.  Something I'd
> give to a 10 year old or my grandmother to play bejewelled, fakebook, and
> tweet with twits, sure.
>
> -mb
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 12:27 PM Stephen Partington via PLUG-discuss <
> plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote:
>
>> To be honest, there is some significant power in those M1 chips Much more
>> than it would seem. Linus tech tips does a decent job of looking at the
>> performance and workload and it is rather impressive for a first go-round.
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 12:05 PM Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss <
>> plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote:
>>
>>> >> I would be fascinated by seeing Linux running on that level of an arm
>>> SoC instead of the glorified mobile shoved in laptop silicon.
>>>
>>> I think the arm-based macs are probably great for non-power users that
>>> get by with 8gb of ram (ie. most mac users), run no vm's (including Fusion
>>> for windoze office, etc), and in general don't do much that isn't a basic
>>> app.  Same folks that love to show everyone how they function on an ipad
>>> exclusively as ultimate fanbois, but ultimately don't do much with a
>>> computer anyways.
>>>
>>> Everyone else still needs Fusion+Windoze, windoze apps, etc in an
>>> enterprise as microsoft and others still treat them as a second-class
>>> citizen.  Plus I can't imagine these are very good for video or audio
>>> editing (yet), which others seem to love macs for, but maybe when they get
>>> to the 64 core chips, some more (expandable) ram, and everyone
>>> rewrites/optimizes their software for arm instruction instead of intel.
>>>
>>> Apple devices always seem more of a fashion statement than anything
>>> imho, but whatever one likes...  It's as much a religious debate at this
>>> point as linux vs. windoze.
>>>
>>> -mb
>>>
>>> --

Re: Question about memory for a Dell

[Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss]

Most everything I've seen around the M1 chip come across hacker-news (can't
watch Linus Tech Tips and not get annoyed by his O-face anymore) say it's
heavily software dependent, which great, macos supports, linux if/when
supported probably won't, but as usually apple optimizes their os around
their hardware quite specifically.  Some testing of windoze arm has even
said it runs better on M1 hardware than microsoft arm surface hardware too,
so who knows, but I suspect raw linux would run like ass if/when getting to
work finally.  If more arm vendors follow suit, perhaps, but until then
apple hardware will be another walled garden beholden to their os alone.

I've looked for years to get some hardware such as a tablet or other
thin-ish hardware device to be a go-between between my human interface and
my hardware systems, but I've never found a substitute for just being able
to run different OS's and things on hardware as slim as my laptops.
Android tablets are mostly useless, ipads marginally better, but still
nothing replaces a native hardware pc solution, where simply I need
cpu+memory+disk, and lots of it.  I'll never get that from arm boxes I
think.

My next laptop will likely be a ryzen/threadripper setup and a real gpu.
Intel+nvidia with prime has been an abortion from go some 10 years ago,
can't get worse, but buying an 8/16gb fixed (ie. soldered memory) mac with
an arm proc/gpu will likely never satiate my need even in a laptop with
constantly running separate windows/linux vm's constantly.  Something I'd
give to a 10 year old or my grandmother to play bejewelled, fakebook, and
tweet with twits, sure.

-mb


On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 12:27 PM Stephen Partington via PLUG-discuss <
plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote:

> To be honest, there is some significant power in those M1 chips Much more
> than it would seem. Linus tech tips does a decent job of looking at the
> performance and workload and it is rather impressive for a first go-round.
>
> On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 12:05 PM Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss <
> plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote:
>
>> >> I would be fascinated by seeing Linux running on that level of an arm
>> SoC instead of the glorified mobile shoved in laptop silicon.
>>
>> I think the arm-based macs are probably great for non-power users that
>> get by with 8gb of ram (ie. most mac users), run no vm's (including Fusion
>> for windoze office, etc), and in general don't do much that isn't a basic
>> app.  Same folks that love to show everyone how they function on an ipad
>> exclusively as ultimate fanbois, but ultimately don't do much with a
>> computer anyways.
>>
>> Everyone else still needs Fusion+Windoze, windoze apps, etc in an
>> enterprise as microsoft and others still treat them as a second-class
>> citizen.  Plus I can't imagine these are very good for video or audio
>> editing (yet), which others seem to love macs for, but maybe when they get
>> to the 64 core chips, some more (expandable) ram, and everyone
>> rewrites/optimizes their software for arm instruction instead of intel.
>>
>> Apple devices always seem more of a fashion statement than anything imho,
>> but whatever one likes...  It's as much a religious debate at this point as
>> linux vs. windoze.
>>
>> -mb
>>
>> ---
>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>
>
>
> --
> A mouse trap, placed on top of your alarm clock, will prevent you from
> rolling over and going back to sleep after you hit the snooze button.
>
> Stephen
>
> ---
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: Question about memory for a Dell

[Stephen Partington via PLUG-discuss]

To be honest, there is some significant power in those M1 chips Much more
than it would seem. Linus tech tips does a decent job of looking at the
performance and workload and it is rather impressive for a first go-round.

On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 12:05 PM Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss <
plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote:

> >> I would be fascinated by seeing Linux running on that level of an arm
> SoC instead of the glorified mobile shoved in laptop silicon.
>
> I think the arm-based macs are probably great for non-power users that get
> by with 8gb of ram (ie. most mac users), run no vm's (including Fusion for
> windoze office, etc), and in general don't do much that isn't a basic app.
> Same folks that love to show everyone how they function on an ipad
> exclusively as ultimate fanbois, but ultimately don't do much with a
> computer anyways.
>
> Everyone else still needs Fusion+Windoze, windoze apps, etc in an
> enterprise as microsoft and others still treat them as a second-class
> citizen.  Plus I can't imagine these are very good for video or audio
> editing (yet), which others seem to love macs for, but maybe when they get
> to the 64 core chips, some more (expandable) ram, and everyone
> rewrites/optimizes their software for arm instruction instead of intel.
>
> Apple devices always seem more of a fashion statement than anything imho,
> but whatever one likes...  It's as much a religious debate at this point as
> linux vs. windoze.
>
> -mb
>
> ---
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss



-- 
A mouse trap, placed on top of your alarm clock, will prevent you from
rolling over and going back to sleep after you hit the snooze button.

Stephen
---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: Question about memory for a Dell

[Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss]

>> I would be fascinated by seeing Linux running on that level of an arm
SoC instead of the glorified mobile shoved in laptop silicon.

I think the arm-based macs are probably great for non-power users that get
by with 8gb of ram (ie. most mac users), run no vm's (including Fusion for
windoze office, etc), and in general don't do much that isn't a basic app.
Same folks that love to show everyone how they function on an ipad
exclusively as ultimate fanbois, but ultimately don't do much with a
computer anyways.

Everyone else still needs Fusion+Windoze, windoze apps, etc in an
enterprise as microsoft and others still treat them as a second-class
citizen.  Plus I can't imagine these are very good for video or audio
editing (yet), which others seem to love macs for, but maybe when they get
to the 64 core chips, some more (expandable) ram, and everyone
rewrites/optimizes their software for arm instruction instead of intel.

Apple devices always seem more of a fashion statement than anything imho,
but whatever one likes...  It's as much a religious debate at this point as
linux vs. windoze.

-mb
---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: Question about memory for a Dell

[Stephen Partington via PLUG-discuss]

I would be fascinated by seeing Linux running on that level of an arm SoC
instead of the glorified mobile shoved in laptop silicon.

For ram, My suggestion is to match the speed = to or just above. The modern
ram is semi programmable now which makes it flexible, and to some extent
dynamically flexible.

If you do the same match the SPD timings and latency, as you want to at
least keep the same level of performance on your new ram compared to the
old.

Otherwise, you can push things about all over the place without much issue
(as of ddr3 and later) unless you are overclocking or somesuch, which it
sounds like you are not. This is from personal experience with the
Optiplex 7010.

On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 8:11 AM Thomas Scott via PLUG-discuss <
plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote:

> Cue the probable: Apple may be expensive, but I rarely have failures with
> it. My wife's 2011 Macbook Pro was just updated with 16GB Ram and a 255 GB
> SSD - it has no issues doing anything she needs it to. That being said, it
> is no longer "eligible" for "feature" updates via MacOS, although it is
> clearly capable of handling the load.
>
> I stick with Apple for my desktop (given the choice) and Linux for my
> servers :)
>
> My biggest heartache is seeing that the death of the hackintosh is on the
> horizon with switching to the ARM CPU set, but who knows? If they can get
> Linux working on it, and I've seen large interest in getting Linux on the
> M1 chipset, maybe they'll find a way to put MacOS on off the shelf
> components as we've been able to do with x86/64
>
> - Thomas Scott | mr.thomas.sc...@gmail.com
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 11:01 PM Jim via PLUG-discuss <
> plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote:
>
>> I definitely won't be buying an Apple anything.  I can't afford them.
>> Dmidecode tells me the DIMMS are 4096 MB, 1600 MT/s and made by
>> Hynix/Hyundai. That makes it easy to figure out what I need.  Thanks to you
>> and Todd Cole for replying.  I
>> On 1/14/21 8:01 PM, Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss wrote:
>>
>> Memory hasn't been as finicky in years than I found it 10-20 years or
>> more now, most seem fairly tolerant as long as you match up specs.
>>
>> If using windoze, install cpu-z and just match the specs, speed,
>> unbuffered, ddr-class, etc.  Likewise using dmidecode under linux, just
>> match spec what is there now.  If using a mac, just pay whatever overpriced
>> ram apple wants to sell you because you or your sponsor can obviously
>> afford it.  Probably a better way under mac, I'm sure google knows most
>> sticks are probably compatible there too realistically.
>>
>> I do miss when there used to be the technology swap meets over in Mesa
>> here to find old/dated hardware for stuff like this, I think that all moved
>> to Craigslist, now Letgo and others, always ebay if nothing else.  I always
>> buy used ram, particularly when talking the more pricey large ECC server
>> stuff, really haven't had complaints personally doing so.  Last time I put
>> 128gb in my desktop, I did so for around a grand from ebay getting old
>> server dimms from a retired cisco ucs box, same memory, which from dell
>> would have been some $8k of absurdity.
>>
>> -mb
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 4:11 PM Jim via PLUG-discuss <
>> plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Recently I bought a Dell Optiplex 7010.  Today I started looking for
>>> some more memory (2 4GB DIMMs) to put in it.  Some said it was for the
>>> Dell while others didn't claim to be for a specific model.   I did
>>> notice that the ones claiming to be for a Dell were about twice the cost
>>> of those that didn't and I don't want to pay the extra if I can avoid
>>> it. I'm sending links to a couple of the choices.  Can someone tell me
>>> if there's any difference between the two? Thanks.
>>>
>>> https://tinyurl.com/y69nepup
>>>
>>> https://tinyurl.com/y54gjnfz
>>>
>>> ---
>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>>
>>
>> ---
>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail 
>> settings:https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>>
>> ---
>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
&

Re: Question about memory for a Dell

[Thomas Scott via PLUG-discuss]

Cue the probable: Apple may be expensive, but I rarely have failures with
it. My wife's 2011 Macbook Pro was just updated with 16GB Ram and a 255 GB
SSD - it has no issues doing anything she needs it to. That being said, it
is no longer "eligible" for "feature" updates via MacOS, although it is
clearly capable of handling the load.

I stick with Apple for my desktop (given the choice) and Linux for my
servers :)

My biggest heartache is seeing that the death of the hackintosh is on the
horizon with switching to the ARM CPU set, but who knows? If they can get
Linux working on it, and I've seen large interest in getting Linux on the
M1 chipset, maybe they'll find a way to put MacOS on off the shelf
components as we've been able to do with x86/64

- Thomas Scott | mr.thomas.sc...@gmail.com


On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 11:01 PM Jim via PLUG-discuss <
plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote:

> I definitely won't be buying an Apple anything.  I can't afford them.
> Dmidecode tells me the DIMMS are 4096 MB, 1600 MT/s and made by
> Hynix/Hyundai. That makes it easy to figure out what I need.  Thanks to you
> and Todd Cole for replying.  I
> On 1/14/21 8:01 PM, Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss wrote:
>
> Memory hasn't been as finicky in years than I found it 10-20 years or more
> now, most seem fairly tolerant as long as you match up specs.
>
> If using windoze, install cpu-z and just match the specs, speed,
> unbuffered, ddr-class, etc.  Likewise using dmidecode under linux, just
> match spec what is there now.  If using a mac, just pay whatever overpriced
> ram apple wants to sell you because you or your sponsor can obviously
> afford it.  Probably a better way under mac, I'm sure google knows most
> sticks are probably compatible there too realistically.
>
> I do miss when there used to be the technology swap meets over in Mesa
> here to find old/dated hardware for stuff like this, I think that all moved
> to Craigslist, now Letgo and others, always ebay if nothing else.  I always
> buy used ram, particularly when talking the more pricey large ECC server
> stuff, really haven't had complaints personally doing so.  Last time I put
> 128gb in my desktop, I did so for around a grand from ebay getting old
> server dimms from a retired cisco ucs box, same memory, which from dell
> would have been some $8k of absurdity.
>
> -mb
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 4:11 PM Jim via PLUG-discuss <
> plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote:
>
>> Recently I bought a Dell Optiplex 7010.  Today I started looking for
>> some more memory (2 4GB DIMMs) to put in it.  Some said it was for the
>> Dell while others didn't claim to be for a specific model.   I did
>> notice that the ones claiming to be for a Dell were about twice the cost
>> of those that didn't and I don't want to pay the extra if I can avoid
>> it. I'm sending links to a couple of the choices.  Can someone tell me
>> if there's any difference between the two? Thanks.
>>
>> https://tinyurl.com/y69nepup
>>
>> https://tinyurl.com/y54gjnfz
>>
>> ---
>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>
>
> ---
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail 
> settings:https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>
> ---
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: Question about memory for a Dell

[Jim via PLUG-discuss]

I definitely won't be buying an Apple anything.  I can't afford them.  
Dmidecode tells me the DIMMS are 4096 MB, 1600 MT/s and made by 
Hynix/Hyundai. That makes it easy to figure out what I need.  Thanks to 
you and Todd Cole for replying.  I


On 1/14/21 8:01 PM, Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss wrote:
Memory hasn't been as finicky in years than I found it 10-20 years or 
more now, most seem fairly tolerant as long as you match up specs.


If using windoze, install cpu-z and just match the specs, speed, 
unbuffered, ddr-class, etc.  Likewise using dmidecode under linux, 
just match spec what is there now.  If using a mac, just pay whatever 
overpriced ram apple wants to sell you because you or your sponsor can 
obviously afford it.  Probably a better way under mac, I'm sure google 
knows most sticks are probably compatible there too realistically.


I do miss when there used to be the technology swap meets over in Mesa 
here to find old/dated hardware for stuff like this, I think that all 
moved to Craigslist, now Letgo and others, always ebay if nothing 
else.  I always buy used ram, particularly when talking the more 
pricey large ECC server stuff, really haven't had complaints 
personally doing so. Last time I put 128gb in my desktop, I did so for 
around a grand from ebay getting old server dimms from a retired cisco 
ucs box, same memory, which from dell would have been some $8k of 
absurdity.


-mb


On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 4:11 PM Jim via PLUG-discuss 
<mailto:plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org>> wrote:


Recently I bought a Dell Optiplex 7010.  Today I started looking for
some more memory (2 4GB DIMMs) to put in it.  Some said it was for
the
Dell while others didn't claim to be for a specific model.   I did
notice that the ones claiming to be for a Dell were about twice
the cost
of those that didn't and I don't want to pay the extra if I can avoid
it. I'm sending links to a couple of the choices.  Can someone
tell me
if there's any difference between the two? Thanks.

https://tinyurl.com/y69nepup

https://tinyurl.com/y54gjnfz

---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
<mailto:PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org>
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss


---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: Question about memory for a Dell

[Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss]

Memory hasn't been as finicky in years than I found it 10-20 years or more
now, most seem fairly tolerant as long as you match up specs.

If using windoze, install cpu-z and just match the specs, speed,
unbuffered, ddr-class, etc.  Likewise using dmidecode under linux, just
match spec what is there now.  If using a mac, just pay whatever overpriced
ram apple wants to sell you because you or your sponsor can obviously
afford it.  Probably a better way under mac, I'm sure google knows most
sticks are probably compatible there too realistically.

I do miss when there used to be the technology swap meets over in Mesa here
to find old/dated hardware for stuff like this, I think that all moved to
Craigslist, now Letgo and others, always ebay if nothing else.  I always
buy used ram, particularly when talking the more pricey large ECC server
stuff, really haven't had complaints personally doing so.  Last time I put
128gb in my desktop, I did so for around a grand from ebay getting old
server dimms from a retired cisco ucs box, same memory, which from dell
would have been some $8k of absurdity.

-mb


On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 4:11 PM Jim via PLUG-discuss <
plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote:

> Recently I bought a Dell Optiplex 7010.  Today I started looking for
> some more memory (2 4GB DIMMs) to put in it.  Some said it was for the
> Dell while others didn't claim to be for a specific model.   I did
> notice that the ones claiming to be for a Dell were about twice the cost
> of those that didn't and I don't want to pay the extra if I can avoid
> it. I'm sending links to a couple of the choices.  Can someone tell me
> if there's any difference between the two? Thanks.
>
> https://tinyurl.com/y69nepup
>
> https://tinyurl.com/y54gjnfz
>
> ---
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: Question about memory for a Dell

[Jim via PLUG-discuss]

Thank you .  I don't live in the Valley, but what you've told me will 
save me some cash.  Thanks again.


On 1/14/21 4:49 PM, Todd Cole via PLUG-discuss wrote:

I maintain about 15 Dell Optiplex 7010
They do use several different Motherboards but so far all have used 
standard DDR3 unbuffered Memory up to 32GB
Factory ram is usually Hynix 4G 2Rx8 PC3-1200U some have 2 slots 
others have 4 slots
Resell Electronics/Westech Recycling 220 S 9th St #400, Phoenix, AZ 
85034 Has lots of used Ram in stock
4Gb is about 5$ 8Gb is about 15$ as I recall  8GB are not always in 
stock but I buy all of them when they have them



On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 4:03 PM Jim via PLUG-discuss 
<mailto:plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org>> wrote:


Recently I bought a Dell Optiplex 7010.  Today I started looking for
some more memory (2 4GB DIMMs) to put in it.  Some said it was for
the
Dell while others didn't claim to be for a specific model.   I did
notice that the ones claiming to be for a Dell were about twice
the cost
of those that didn't and I don't want to pay the extra if I can avoid
it. I'm sending links to a couple of the choices.  Can someone
tell me
if there's any difference between the two? Thanks.

https://tinyurl.com/y69nepup

https://tinyurl.com/y54gjnfz

---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
<mailto:PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org>
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss



--
Todd Cole
Ubuntu Arizona Team
2928 W El Caminito
Phoenix AZ  85051-3957
to...@azloco.com <mailto:to...@azloco.com>
602-677-9402

---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: Question about memory for a Dell

[Todd Cole via PLUG-discuss]

I maintain about 15 Dell Optiplex 7010
They do use several different Motherboards but so far all have used
standard DDR3 unbuffered Memory up to 32GB
Factory ram is usually Hynix 4G 2Rx8 PC3-1200U some have 2 slots others
have 4 slots
Resell Electronics/Westech Recycling 220 S 9th St #400, Phoenix, AZ 85034
Has lots of used Ram in stock
4Gb is about 5$ 8Gb is about 15$ as I recall  8GB are not always in stock
but I buy all of them when they have them


On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 4:03 PM Jim via PLUG-discuss <
plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote:

> Recently I bought a Dell Optiplex 7010.  Today I started looking for
> some more memory (2 4GB DIMMs) to put in it.  Some said it was for the
> Dell while others didn't claim to be for a specific model.   I did
> notice that the ones claiming to be for a Dell were about twice the cost
> of those that didn't and I don't want to pay the extra if I can avoid
> it. I'm sending links to a couple of the choices.  Can someone tell me
> if there's any difference between the two? Thanks.
>
> https://tinyurl.com/y69nepup
>
> https://tinyurl.com/y54gjnfz
>
> ---
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss



-- 
Todd Cole
Ubuntu Arizona Team
2928 W El Caminito
Phoenix AZ  85051-3957
to...@azloco.com
602-677-9402
---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Question about memory for a Dell

[Jim via PLUG-discuss]

Recently I bought a Dell Optiplex 7010.  Today I started looking for 
some more memory (2 4GB DIMMs) to put in it.  Some said it was for the 
Dell while others didn't claim to be for a specific model.   I did 
notice that the ones claiming to be for a Dell were about twice the cost 
of those that didn't and I don't want to pay the extra if I can avoid 
it. I'm sending links to a couple of the choices.  Can someone tell me 
if there's any difference between the two? Thanks.


https://tinyurl.com/y69nepup

https://tinyurl.com/y54gjnfz

---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: DDR4 Memory for Mac

[Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss]

Every time I buy memory, which is rare, "mac certified" means if it will
work in a mac, it'll work in most anything else agreeably.  I usually fall
into the "else" category, and not really run into a stick of memory my pc
hasn't liked in decades.  Good to know it meets apple standards as well
that must mean it was anointed by God or at least Steve Jobs' ghost.

-mb

On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 9:52 AM Stephen Partington via PLUG-discuss <
plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote:

> Mac is very snippy with its SPD programming. but as long as the type/speed
> matches your needs it should be fine.
>
> On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 3:05 PM Retro64XYZ via PLUG-discuss <
> plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote:
>
>> Nope. It'll work on most any computer. Mac is picky though so you usually
>> want to use a Mac compat DD4 stick or else you might suffer issues.
>> On 11/19/20 12:58 PM, Seabass via PLUG-discuss wrote:
>>
>> Is memory in Mac only compatible with Macs?
>> I'd take it but don't know if that is a thing.
>>
>> ___
>>
>> Hey all. I have a package containing an unused Timetec 16gb DDR4 2400mhz
>> memory for a Mac. If anyone wants it, they can have it for free. I got it
>> from a friend who could not use it and I have no use for it either.
>>
>> ---
>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail 
>> settings:https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>>
>> ---
>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>
>
>
> --
> A mouse trap, placed on top of your alarm clock, will prevent you from
> rolling over and going back to sleep after you hit the snooze button.
>
> Stephen
>
> ---
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: DDR4 Memory for Mac

[Stephen Partington via PLUG-discuss]

Mac is very snippy with its SPD programming. but as long as the type/speed
matches your needs it should be fine.

On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 3:05 PM Retro64XYZ via PLUG-discuss <
plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote:

> Nope. It'll work on most any computer. Mac is picky though so you usually
> want to use a Mac compat DD4 stick or else you might suffer issues.
> On 11/19/20 12:58 PM, Seabass via PLUG-discuss wrote:
>
> Is memory in Mac only compatible with Macs?
> I'd take it but don't know if that is a thing.
>
> ___
>
> Hey all. I have a package containing an unused Timetec 16gb DDR4 2400mhz
> memory for a Mac. If anyone wants it, they can have it for free. I got it
> from a friend who could not use it and I have no use for it either.
>
> ---
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail 
> settings:https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>
> ---
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss



-- 
A mouse trap, placed on top of your alarm clock, will prevent you from
rolling over and going back to sleep after you hit the snooze button.

Stephen
---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: Mac DDR4 Memory for free

[Eric Oyen via PLUG-discuss]

Which type of Mac. The MacBook series, Mac mini, iMac, etc?

Inquiring minds want to know!

-Eric
From the Central Offices of the Technomage Guild, Acquisitions dept.


> On Nov 18, 2020, at 4:19 PM, Daniel Stasinski via PLUG-discuss 
>  wrote:
> 
> Hey all.  I have a package containing an unused Timetec 16gb DDR4 2400mhz 
> memory for a Mac.  If anyone wants it, they can have it for free.  I got it 
> from a friend who could not use it and I have no use for it either.
> 
> Daniel P. Stasinski
> dan...@genericinbox.com <mailto:dan...@genericinbox.com>
> I ✞
> <20201112_204531.jpg>---
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: DDR4 Memory for Mac

[Retro64XYZ via PLUG-discuss]

Nope. It'll work on most any computer. Mac is picky though so you 
usually want to use a Mac compat DD4 stick or else you might suffer issues.


On 11/19/20 12:58 PM, Seabass via PLUG-discuss wrote:

Is memory in Mac only compatible with Macs?
I'd take it but don't know if that is a thing.

___

Hey all. I have a package containing an unused Timetec 16gb DDR4 2400mhz
memory for a Mac. If anyone wants it, they can have it for free. I got it
from a friend who could not use it and I have no use for it either.

---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: DDR4 Memory for Mac

[Seabass via PLUG-discuss]

Is memory in Mac only compatible with Macs?
I'd take it but don't know if that is a thing.

___

Hey all. I have a package containing an unused Timetec 16gb DDR4 2400mhz
memory for a Mac. If anyone wants it, they can have it for free. I got it
from a friend who could not use it and I have no use for it either.---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Mac DDR4 Memory for free

[Daniel Stasinski via PLUG-discuss]

Hey all.  I have a package containing an unused Timetec 16gb DDR4 2400mhz
memory for a Mac.  If anyone wants it, they can have it for free.  I got it
from a friend who could not use it and I have no use for it either.

*Daniel P. Stasinski*
dan...@genericinbox.com
I ✞
---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: Linux Memory (again)

[Eric Oyen via PLUG-discuss]

Oh yeah, and win blows 10 is also an accessibility FUBAR, especially if the 
windows explorer program dies, then the stupid start bar won’t work.

-Eric
From the Central Offices of the Technomage Guild, Dangling Accessibility Dept.


> On Nov 9, 2020, at 2:57 AM, Steve Litt via PLUG-discuss 
>  wrote:
> 
> On Sat, 07 Nov 2020 19:19:29 -0700
> Ryan Petris via PLUG-discuss  wrote:
> 
> 
>> Lastly, if we're ever going to see mass-market usage of Linux,
> 
> We already have mass market Linux usage, on the server. If you mean on
> the desktop, I haven't seen much movement from Windows desktops to Linux
> desktops this century.
> 
>> desktop environments like Gnome and KDE are going to be the ones to
>> take us there. 
> 
> I think it's statements like the preceding that cause it to be true.
> LXDE is very simple, with a panel and a start button, that anybody can
> operate. Windows 8 and 10 are messes that must be learned, by trial and
> error, over time.
> 
>> Realistically, no normie coming from Windows/MacOS is
>> going to want to use something like OpenBox or other minimal window
>> managers like DWM, i3, etc.. 
> 
> True. They'd need  a panel. LXDE, LXQt, and even the slightly bloatier
> and less reliable xfce come to mind. 
> 
> As far as normies, we've been trying to bring them to the Linux desktop
> and failed. Few Linux desktop users are normies.
> 
>> They're going to want it to just work,
>> with an interface that has familiar concepts to the ones they're used
>> to if it doesn't flat out look like Windows or MacOS.
> 
> From what I've seen of MacOS, LXDE looks kind of like it. As far as
> looking like Windows 10, I don't know of anybody who likes that kind of
> interface. It was created to make a computer screen look like a
> smartphone and vice versa, and became a workflow mess because of that.
> 
> SteveT
> 
> Steve Litt 
> Autumn 2020 featured book: Thriving in Tough Times
> http://www.troubleshooters.com/thrive
> ---
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: Linux Memory (again)

[Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss]

On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 2:05 AM Steve Litt via PLUG-discuss <
plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote:

> On Sun, 8 Nov 2020 13:24:36 -0700
>
> Set Firefox to dump its cache and other stuff upon exit, and exit it at
> least once per day.
>

The real pain in the arse is relaunching each profile of mine.  I do so
manually, probably a jackass for not scripting something to do this, but
it's infrequent enough I just do it.  Nightly sort of thing would need
scripting and some restoration after.

I see merit in this, just wish these browsers would wipe their own arse
occasionally.


> Also, I recommend you run a memory test on all the machine's RAM for
> several passes. Keep an eye on the temperature: Detailed RAM tests get
> things hot. Make sure your machine's fans are working well, the machine
> is in a well ventilated area, and for the duration of the test I'd turn
> the air conditioner down to 68 and wear a jacket, or if you're up north
> open a window and wear a jacket.
>

Yeah, I got a ventilation stand for my xps15, ripped it apart, installed
new thermal paste, thermal pads on mosfets to the chassis, and various
other thermal hacks as these are known to throttle down under load.
Thermals were better by a bit, but nothing astounding.  My office does get
hot with 2-3 49" tv's running all time, and various
network/security/wifi/other devices running in here a plenty.  Summer in AZ
is a challenge, winter I just use it as a heater for the house.  This is
excluding my server room downstairs that heats the bottom half.

Find a way to shrink those profiles. They grow with time, and I'm sure
> most of that growth is unnecessary and can be trimmed back.
>

My problem is the apps.  Obviously anything Microsoft is a browser pig, and
running 3-4 profiles with full email, calendar, teams, will use some ~500mb
of memory each, but by far no 40gb which is realized for use at the os
level, and not just reserved/virtual memory.  Gsuite isn't much better,
rest is just random crap.


> GVim is pretty easy on memory. I use it, you might like it too.
>

I will check this out, I tend to live in text editors one way or another,
but never got used to using vim entirely in a shell.


> If I'm reading you correctly, you're dealing with a dozen or more
> customers every day and want to keep things ready for them. Unless
> you're *simultaneously* dealing with *all* of them, I'd suggest you
> ditch the VMs and use containers like lxc or docker, one per client,
> configure them so they boot very fast, and shut them down when not
> needed.
>

Yes for most extents, I probably deal with 2-5 active projects each week,
random interjections for support, random sales calls, random requests for
info all over really.  I tend to just keep all the crap open all the time,
better or worse.


> You pay dearly for that pretty, and there's a wide variety of wm/de's
> (Window Manager/Desktop Environment) that are very functional. If you
> already have 128GB of RAM, I don't think you can purchase your way out
> of this problem, and this computer isn't a luxury, it's a livelihood.
> Try LXDE instead of KDE. I think you'll find it acceptable, while still
> respecting your RAM and CPU.
>

The one time I did, I found it quite foreign to me, and didn't like it at
all.

I'd probably still use kde4 if they ever fixed multi-monitor support, but
literally said "will not fix" and moved on to 5.x, where it took them a
good while to fix even there, and damn sure not fully.


> I know what you mean. Every night, or every morning, I need to go
> through and shut about 2 dozen windows. I don't call it purging, I call
> it housekeeping.
>

Again, don't disagree I should do this more, but rather find some happy
place of memory to literally just keep it going as-is.


> Are you running six firefoxes with six different profiles on Windows,
> each with several documents open? If not, you're comparing apples with
> oranges. But anyway, I'm certain that, with this hardware running your
> life and your business, you don't have to live this way. I think that
> with a small adjustment in software and some moderate adjustments in
> workflow, you can have a very snappy machine that does everything you
> want it to.
>

So with profiles, either firefox or chrome, it instantiates each
separately.  Meaning I install plugins, themes, bookmarks, everything
separately for each.  I presume things like cache as well, as that's where
things like M$ and even Google barf trying to share different accounts,
apps, and maintain separation.

I suspect this is why I find my browser using 40gb of ram, but really,
really!?

On my system with 128gb of ram, I'd find chrome using some 60gb of ram at
times.  Other stupid things like pavucontrol I'd find using 20gb of ram at
times.  As a volume control 

Re: Linux Memory (again)

[Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss]

>> Micheal. Makes me wonder what hardware or architecture you are using
(hardware) There might be some things that you can do based on that.

My current hardware is a plane dell xps15 9350 (~2015), i7 proc, 1tb nvme,
and loaded out with 64gb ram.  It's got an nvidia gpu, but I've never
gotten prime as a hot mess to work, so mostly rely on the intel gpu.

Before this my desktop, was a dell precision 7950, dual xeon socket/cpu,
20/40 cores/threads, 128gb ram, dual raid1 nvme disks, and an nvidia
1070gtx gpu.

I'm willing to throw some money at a problem obviously to make it go away,
I just can't seem to still make them go away.  My next system will likely
be a ryzen/threadripper.

-mb


On Sun, Nov 8, 2020 at 8:19 PM Stephen Partington via PLUG-discuss <
plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote:

> Micheal. Makes me wonder what hardware or architecture you are using
> (hardware) There might be some things that you can do based on that.
>
> I know and Machines have felt very different in memory management than
> intel. Even their Bulldozer architecture they really still felt very
> snappy. And threadripper takes this to a new level with quad-channel
> memory. Epyc takes it even further with 8 channel memory. while it may not
> resolve the way it is handled it may lessen the impact.
>
> On Sun, Nov 8, 2020 at 7:45 PM Eric Oyen via PLUG-discuss <
> plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote:
>
>> Yeah, It isn’t just on linux where some of these apps have issues. OS X
>> also sees a lot of the same issues (I never maintain more than 4 open tabs
>> of Chrome and I don’t bother with Firefox as it’s an accessibility
>> nightmare under VoiceOver screen reader). About the only DM’s in linux
>> where the ORCA screen reader and braille facilities work best are GTK based
>> ones (like Gnome, FVWM, and some others) and won’t even work at all in KDE
>> without significant modifications to the KDE environment (and even then,
>> with only partial accessibility).
>>
>> The reason I bring up the accessibility issue is that these memory hogs
>> can have detrimental effects on screen reader and braille display
>> performance Most times on a linux system, I will simply just use either
>> ORCA for the DM or go to Emacsspeak for console mode and use Lynx (or one
>> of its variants) for web browsing. Much smaller footprint. As for office
>> apps, I haven’t found anything out there that isn’t a memory hog in one way
>> or another. So, I do what I can to minimize those issues. About the only
>> thing I have been unable to do is have the screen reader read remotely fed
>> apps (forwarded X display types) They appear only as a graphic interface
>> with no content inside of them. Considering the versatility of Linux and
>> most Linux based apps, this is a glaring issue that seriously needs to be
>> resolved.
>>
>> Btw, as far as memory issues goes, I really wish we could go back to the
>> days of programming when everything had to be tight to fit into a small ram
>> footprint. Sure, those programs were a little less user friendly, but they
>> didn’t have nearly the bugs or the bloat of current apps.
>>
>> Just my 2 cents worth.
>>
>> -Eric
>> From the Central Offices of the Technomage Guild, Memory allocation and
>> configuration Dept.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Nov 8, 2020, at 1:24 PM, Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss <
>> plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote:
>>
>> Inline here:
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 6, 2020 at 6:28 PM Steve Litt via PLUG-discuss <
>> plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 6 Nov 2020 07:48:40 -0700
>>> Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss  wrote:
>>>
>>> Chrome/Chromium and Firefox are absolute pigs. I finally tamed Firefox
>>> ty setting it to drop all cache and other stuff upon exit, and then I
>>> shut down all instances of Firefox every day.
>>>
>>
>> They all are pigs I find.  Tried Brave, Chrome, Chromium, and keep ending
>> up back at firefox as a lesser of evils.  Chrome is the new IE, so now I
>> *need* it occasionally for plugins.  I've been using tab suspenders across
>> each, doesn't help much.
>>
>> My problem is I have to keep different profiles for different companies I
>> work with, usually no less than 4-6 at a time, 2 at least for my personal
>> gsuite and work.  Mostly I do so for M$ O365/Teams, as they can't figure
>> out how to make it work across organizations or seemingly comprehend why
>> anyone would.  Hint: Consultants that work for 5-10 orgs at a time.  Each
>> profile just ends up hoarding ram, which ends up being 30-40gb at times on
>> my syst

Re: Linux Memory (again)

[Steve Litt via PLUG-discuss]

On Sat, 07 Nov 2020 19:19:29 -0700
Ryan Petris via PLUG-discuss  wrote:


> Lastly, if we're ever going to see mass-market usage of Linux,

We already have mass market Linux usage, on the server. If you mean on
the desktop, I haven't seen much movement from Windows desktops to Linux
desktops this century.

> desktop environments like Gnome and KDE are going to be the ones to
> take us there. 

I think it's statements like the preceding that cause it to be true.
LXDE is very simple, with a panel and a start button, that anybody can
operate. Windows 8 and 10 are messes that must be learned, by trial and
error, over time.

> Realistically, no normie coming from Windows/MacOS is
> going to want to use something like OpenBox or other minimal window
> managers like DWM, i3, etc.. 

True. They'd need  a panel. LXDE, LXQt, and even the slightly bloatier
and less reliable xfce come to mind. 

As far as normies, we've been trying to bring them to the Linux desktop
and failed. Few Linux desktop users are normies.

> They're going to want it to just work,
> with an interface that has familiar concepts to the ones they're used
> to if it doesn't flat out look like Windows or MacOS.

From what I've seen of MacOS, LXDE looks kind of like it. As far as
looking like Windows 10, I don't know of anybody who likes that kind of
interface. It was created to make a computer screen look like a
smartphone and vice versa, and became a workflow mess because of that.

SteveT

Steve Litt 
Autumn 2020 featured book: Thriving in Tough Times
http://www.troubleshooters.com/thrive
---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: Linux Memory (again)

[Steve Litt via PLUG-discuss]

On Sun, 8 Nov 2020 13:24:36 -0700
Michael Butash  wrote:


> They all are pigs I find.  Tried Brave, Chrome, Chromium, and keep
> ending up back at firefox as a lesser of evils.  Chrome is the new
> IE, so now I *need* it occasionally for plugins.  I've been using tab
> suspenders across each, doesn't help much.

Set Firefox to dump its cache and other stuff upon exit, and exit it at
least once per day.

Also, I recommend you run a memory test on all the machine's RAM for
several passes. Keep an eye on the temperature: Detailed RAM tests get
things hot. Make sure your machine's fans are working well, the machine
is in a well ventilated area, and for the duration of the test I'd turn
the air conditioner down to 68 and wear a jacket, or if you're up north
open a window and wear a jacket.


> 
> My problem is I have to keep different profiles for different
> companies I work with, usually no less than 4-6 at a time, 2 at least
> for my personal gsuite and work.  Mostly I do so for M$ O365/Teams,
> as they can't figure out how to make it work across organizations or
> seemingly comprehend why anyone would.  Hint: Consultants that work
> for 5-10 orgs at a time.  Each profile just ends up hoarding ram,
> which ends up being 30-40gb at times on my system.

Find a way to shrink those profiles. They grow with time, and I'm sure
most of that growth is unnecessary and can be trimmed back.

> 
> > I don't know how many VMs you run, but those eat up memory.
> >  
> 
> I have a mainstream Win10 build with visio and other windoze-y crap I
> need, 8gb of ram, and keep a few win10 ameliorated editions for
> clients to minimize footprint with 4gb.  Usually only 2 windoze, 1 if
> I can. Occasionally a few other 2-4gb ram linux systems, but
> typically ~20gb for vbox and my vms.  It's where all the other memory
> goes I have a hard time with, which I really can't identify.
> 
> What the heck kind of editor requires 3-4GB RAM? That sounds crazy to
> > me. Why do you have a few dozen files open simultaneously?
> >  
> 
> Fine questions really, this tends to be where I'm bit odd.  I've found
> whether using Pluma, Gedit, or even qqnotepad, they all tend to get a
> bit crazy with a lot of tabs.  I presume things like undo memory,
> things like that are adding up, but I'm still like geez, really?

GVim is pretty easy on memory. I use it, you might like it too.

> 
> Why so many?  I mostly do network and security consulting, with config
> files from existing devices, resulting operational output extracted in
> text, across multiple orgs at a time.  Not to mention configuration
> changes I'm making for template deployment off those, so it gets a
> bit crazy flipping between dozens of configs at a time.
> 
> If I could find better ways to manage some of this, it would be nice,
> but seems everything just dumps this sort of thing into memory
> hoarding.
> 
> Libreoffice is kind of a pig. Is there something else you can use? And
> > why a dozen or two simultaneous files open? This sounds like a
> > workflow nightmare. Do you mean one Libreoffice instance with 24
> > files open, or a bunch of separate Libreoffices in VMs. If the
> > latter, yeah, that's going to burn a lot of RAM, even more than one
> > instance with 24 documents.
> >  
> 
> I often blame Libreoffice, only to kill it with like 20 spreadsheets
> open, and 30 write files and find it was using (only) around 4gb of
> ram.  I take notes a lot in libre because it's restore on crash has
> proven pretty flawless vs., well anything else.  I mostly prefer
> pluma for text input and notes, but no good restore.  Tried qqnotepad
> that had a restore function, it was highly dysfunctional.

If I'm reading you correctly, you're dealing with a dozen or more
customers every day and want to keep things ready for them. Unless
you're *simultaneously* dealing with *all* of them, I'd suggest you
ditch the VMs and use containers like lxc or docker, one per client,
configure them so they boot very fast, and shut them down when not
needed. 


> 
> > O, KDE. I call that Krash, Delay, Expand. See
> > http://troubleshooters.com/lpm/201202/201202.htm . I use OpenBox,
> > which is a low-RAM, just-the-facts window manager. On every machine
> > I ever used KDE, performance was bad and on lower RAM machines,
> > things ground to a halt.
> >
> > Gnome and KDE are luxuries for folks with lightning fast processors
> > and huge quantities of RAM, who want their computers to perform
> > like a 2015 computer with 4GB RAM.
> >  
> 
> Yes KDE is a pain, but both pretty and functional.  

You pay dearly for that pretty, and there's a wide variety of wm/de's
(Window Manager/Desktop Environment) that are very functional. If you
already ha

Re: Linux Memory (again)

[Stephen Partington via PLUG-discuss]

Micheal. Makes me wonder what hardware or architecture you are using
(hardware) There might be some things that you can do based on that.

I know and Machines have felt very different in memory management than
intel. Even their Bulldozer architecture they really still felt very
snappy. And threadripper takes this to a new level with quad-channel
memory. Epyc takes it even further with 8 channel memory. while it may not
resolve the way it is handled it may lessen the impact.

On Sun, Nov 8, 2020 at 7:45 PM Eric Oyen via PLUG-discuss <
plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote:

> Yeah, It isn’t just on linux where some of these apps have issues. OS X
> also sees a lot of the same issues (I never maintain more than 4 open tabs
> of Chrome and I don’t bother with Firefox as it’s an accessibility
> nightmare under VoiceOver screen reader). About the only DM’s in linux
> where the ORCA screen reader and braille facilities work best are GTK based
> ones (like Gnome, FVWM, and some others) and won’t even work at all in KDE
> without significant modifications to the KDE environment (and even then,
> with only partial accessibility).
>
> The reason I bring up the accessibility issue is that these memory hogs
> can have detrimental effects on screen reader and braille display
> performance Most times on a linux system, I will simply just use either
> ORCA for the DM or go to Emacsspeak for console mode and use Lynx (or one
> of its variants) for web browsing. Much smaller footprint. As for office
> apps, I haven’t found anything out there that isn’t a memory hog in one way
> or another. So, I do what I can to minimize those issues. About the only
> thing I have been unable to do is have the screen reader read remotely fed
> apps (forwarded X display types) They appear only as a graphic interface
> with no content inside of them. Considering the versatility of Linux and
> most Linux based apps, this is a glaring issue that seriously needs to be
> resolved.
>
> Btw, as far as memory issues goes, I really wish we could go back to the
> days of programming when everything had to be tight to fit into a small ram
> footprint. Sure, those programs were a little less user friendly, but they
> didn’t have nearly the bugs or the bloat of current apps.
>
> Just my 2 cents worth.
>
> -Eric
> From the Central Offices of the Technomage Guild, Memory allocation and
> configuration Dept.
>
>
>
> On Nov 8, 2020, at 1:24 PM, Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss <
> plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote:
>
> Inline here:
>
> On Fri, Nov 6, 2020 at 6:28 PM Steve Litt via PLUG-discuss <
> plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 6 Nov 2020 07:48:40 -0700
>> Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss  wrote:
>>
>> Chrome/Chromium and Firefox are absolute pigs. I finally tamed Firefox
>> ty setting it to drop all cache and other stuff upon exit, and then I
>> shut down all instances of Firefox every day.
>>
>
> They all are pigs I find.  Tried Brave, Chrome, Chromium, and keep ending
> up back at firefox as a lesser of evils.  Chrome is the new IE, so now I
> *need* it occasionally for plugins.  I've been using tab suspenders across
> each, doesn't help much.
>
> My problem is I have to keep different profiles for different companies I
> work with, usually no less than 4-6 at a time, 2 at least for my personal
> gsuite and work.  Mostly I do so for M$ O365/Teams, as they can't figure
> out how to make it work across organizations or seemingly comprehend why
> anyone would.  Hint: Consultants that work for 5-10 orgs at a time.  Each
> profile just ends up hoarding ram, which ends up being 30-40gb at times on
> my system.
>
> I don't know how many VMs you run, but those eat up memory.
>>
>
> I have a mainstream Win10 build with visio and other windoze-y crap I
> need, 8gb of ram, and keep a few win10 ameliorated editions for clients to
> minimize footprint with 4gb.  Usually only 2 windoze, 1 if I can.
> Occasionally a few other 2-4gb ram linux systems, but typically ~20gb for
> vbox and my vms.  It's where all the other memory goes I have a hard time
> with, which I really can't identify.
>
> What the heck kind of editor requires 3-4GB RAM? That sounds crazy to
>> me. Why do you have a few dozen files open simultaneously?
>>
>
> Fine questions really, this tends to be where I'm bit odd.  I've found
> whether using Pluma, Gedit, or even qqnotepad, they all tend to get a bit
> crazy with a lot of tabs.  I presume things like undo memory, things like
> that are adding up, but I'm still like geez, really?
>
> Why so many?  I mostly do network and security consulting, with config
> files from existing devices, resulting operational output extracte

Re: Linux Memory (again)

[Eric Oyen via PLUG-discuss]

Yeah, It isn’t just on linux where some of these apps have issues. OS X also 
sees a lot of the same issues (I never maintain more than 4 open tabs of Chrome 
and I don’t bother with Firefox as it’s an accessibility nightmare under 
VoiceOver screen reader). About the only DM’s in linux where the ORCA screen 
reader and braille facilities work best are GTK based ones (like Gnome, FVWM, 
and some others) and won’t even work at all in KDE without significant 
modifications to the KDE environment (and even then, with only partial 
accessibility).

The reason I bring up the accessibility issue is that these memory hogs can 
have detrimental effects on screen reader and braille display performance Most 
times on a linux system, I will simply just use either ORCA for the DM or go to 
Emacsspeak for console mode and use Lynx (or one of its variants) for web 
browsing. Much smaller footprint. As for office apps, I haven’t found anything 
out there that isn’t a memory hog in one way or another. So, I do what I can to 
minimize those issues. About the only thing I have been unable to do is have 
the screen reader read remotely fed apps (forwarded X display types) They 
appear only as a graphic interface with no content inside of them. Considering 
the versatility of Linux and most Linux based apps, this is a glaring issue 
that seriously needs to be resolved.

Btw, as far as memory issues goes, I really wish we could go back to the days 
of programming when everything had to be tight to fit into a small ram 
footprint. Sure, those programs were a little less user friendly, but they 
didn’t have nearly the bugs or the bloat of current apps.

Just my 2 cents worth.

-Eric
From the Central Offices of the Technomage Guild, Memory allocation and 
configuration Dept.



> On Nov 8, 2020, at 1:24 PM, Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss 
>  wrote:
> 
> Inline here:
> 
> On Fri, Nov 6, 2020 at 6:28 PM Steve Litt via PLUG-discuss 
> mailto:plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org>> 
> wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Nov 2020 07:48:40 -0700
> Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss  <mailto:plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org>> wrote:
> 
> Chrome/Chromium and Firefox are absolute pigs. I finally tamed Firefox
> ty setting it to drop all cache and other stuff upon exit, and then I
> shut down all instances of Firefox every day.
>  
> They all are pigs I find.  Tried Brave, Chrome, Chromium, and keep ending up 
> back at firefox as a lesser of evils.  Chrome is the new IE, so now I *need* 
> it occasionally for plugins.  I've been using tab suspenders across each, 
> doesn't help much.
> 
> My problem is I have to keep different profiles for different companies I 
> work with, usually no less than 4-6 at a time, 2 at least for my personal 
> gsuite and work.  Mostly I do so for M$ O365/Teams, as they can't figure out 
> how to make it work across organizations or seemingly comprehend why anyone 
> would.  Hint: Consultants that work for 5-10 orgs at a time.  Each profile 
> just ends up hoarding ram, which ends up being 30-40gb at times on my system.
> 
> I don't know how many VMs you run, but those eat up memory.
>  
> I have a mainstream Win10 build with visio and other windoze-y crap I need, 
> 8gb of ram, and keep a few win10 ameliorated editions for clients to minimize 
> footprint with 4gb.  Usually only 2 windoze, 1 if I can.  Occasionally a few 
> other 2-4gb ram linux systems, but typically ~20gb for vbox and my vms.  It's 
> where all the other memory goes I have a hard time with, which I really can't 
> identify.
> 
> What the heck kind of editor requires 3-4GB RAM? That sounds crazy to
> me. Why do you have a few dozen files open simultaneously?
> 
> Fine questions really, this tends to be where I'm bit odd.  I've found 
> whether using Pluma, Gedit, or even qqnotepad, they all tend to get a bit 
> crazy with a lot of tabs.  I presume things like undo memory, things like 
> that are adding up, but I'm still like geez, really?
> 
> Why so many?  I mostly do network and security consulting, with config files 
> from existing devices, resulting operational output extracted in text, across 
> multiple orgs at a time.  Not to mention configuration changes I'm making for 
> template deployment off those, so it gets a bit crazy flipping between dozens 
> of configs at a time.
> 
> If I could find better ways to manage some of this, it would be nice, but 
> seems everything just dumps this sort of thing into memory hoarding.
> 
> Libreoffice is kind of a pig. Is there something else you can use? And
> why a dozen or two simultaneous files open? This sounds like a workflow
> nightmare. Do you mean one Libreoffice instance with 24 files open, or
> a bunch of separate Libreoffices in VMs. If the latter, yeah, that's
> going to burn a lot of RAM, even more than one instance with

Re: Linux Memory (again)

[Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss]

Inline:

On Sat, Nov 7, 2020 at 4:26 PM Matt Graham via PLUG-discuss <
plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote:

> On 2020-11-06 18:28, Steve Litt via PLUG-discuss wrote:
> > On Fri, 6 Nov 2020 07:48:40 -0700
> > Michael Butash wrote:
>
> This is definitely not a common thing.  I have never had more than one
> profile.  Then again, I have only worked for one company at a time,
> never 6 at the same time.  Don't you also have something crazy like 4
> monitors at the same time?
>

I don't like it either, as my memory footprint grows exponentially with
each.  Office365/Teams is the goddamn devil here, as I tend to always work
for microsoft-y companies, and they simply do not work well if logged into
separate domains/orgs for me unless I keep them segregated to profiles in
either Chrome or Firefox.  This was a recommendation from gsuite support
when I first opened my business and had a hard time keeping things separate
even between personal and work.  Microshite's Teams app under linux hasn't
figured out how to log into multiple domains/orgs at once (ffs, just copy
Slack features), so I have to run them all in different browsers.

And yeah, a bit crazy probably, 3x 4k/60 displays (laptop built-in + 2x 4k
tv's via TB3 dock).  Before it was 6x 1080p's...  :)


> > Chrome/Chromium and Firefox are absolute pigs. I finally tamed Firefox
> > by setting it to drop all cache and other stuff upon exit, and then I
> > shut down all instances of Firefox every day.
>
> While I don't do that, I find I need to do that every week or so.  I
> have noticed that on OS X firefox, any animated GIF displayed in the
> active tab causes CPU usage to skyrocket and the fan to start blowing.
> Guess how many cow-orkers constantly post animated emojis in the work
> Slack instance?
>

I have this bit of an issue too with Teams.  Running each profile, I keep
firefox Task Manager pinned, and watch what are the worst offenders.  Worst
is always M$ teams using 300-400mb ram, O365 email/calendar second,
Hangouts, Gmail, Gcalendar a bit under, and rest get tab suspended
regularly.  Still somehow across numerous profiles, Firefox feels it needs
30-40gb of memory

> What the heck kind of editor requires 3-4GB RAM? That sounds crazy to
> > me. Why do you have a few dozen files open simultaneously?
>
> As a counterpoint, kate with 10 files open has an RSS of 132M.  Having
> 36 files open in an editor seems a bit crazy to me as well, but I
> usually have 3 to 6 files open in vim, and vim like most text editors
> loads the entire file into memory.  36 files that are all 86M or so
> would easily account for 3G.  Text files that are written by people are
> almost never that large, but log files
>

Don't disagree here, but figure I'm not the only one working with large
text blobs either that this seems a nasty issue.  Maybe a better question
is if there is a better software.  Sadly there's no IDE's for dealing with
Cisco, Juniper, Arista, PAN, etc, so my life revolves around raw text at
times, and lots of it.

>
> > Libreoffice is kind of a pig. Is there something else you can use? And
> > why a dozen or two simultaneous files open? This sounds like a
> > workflow nightmare. Do you mean one Libreoffice instance with 24 files
> open
>
> That seems the most likely scenario.
>

Just one Libreoffice with a lot of files.  Nice part is I can kill -9 it
and reopen right back to where I was at.   Again, multiple customers,
multiple docs, price lists from vendors, sometimes rather complex formulas
I use for configuration generation, Libreoffice does a _lot_ for me and how
I work, but hell, it tends to use less memory than my text editor even if
~4gb of ram.


> 2015-vintage machine, 8G.  I started KDE on Oct. 20, and top says 3912
> M used.  Most of this is firefox, not KDE, though.  Maybe this is a
> distro thing?  Gentoo is somewhat more conservative than most distros
> when it comes to versions and features.  Also I've turned baloo off.  I
> don't need "file indexing", I can use grep -r like a normal person.  :-P
>

Interesting note on baloo - every now and then it's gone mad for me and
I've killed it.  I know where my files are, I really don't need an idiot
search either.  Good point.

I used ubuntu for years, it wasn't much if any more memory friendly.  I
moved to arch trying to help that, but really about the same.  Not tried
gentoo in years, but suspect it's more usage than the distro hearing some
of the input.

AMD FX 3.8 GHz 4-core, 8G, no special handling of firefox.  However, I
> only have one browser profile and generally only one browser window, no
> VMs running, only 1 monitor, and rarely use LibreOffice.  Current GUI
> things are 1 Barrier, 2 Dolphin windows, 2 Gwenview windows, 1 konsole,
> 1 kcalc, 1 GNUcash, 1 Gimp, 1 System Settings, 1 Firefox window wit

Re: Linux Memory (again)

[Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss]

I tend to keep tabs on memory a few ways, I use a memory monitor that shows
me used in kde menu tray, and always run htop.  I flushed everything and
rebooted a few days ago sending this, but it was green entirely to around
58gb of mem before I started forcibly having to kill things.  Killing
everything else I could only get it back to 8-9gb of use, which is still
pretty damn steep, so not sure where the memory is leaking to.

Plasma, KWin, and even SDDM tend to use more memory then they should as
well, certainly growing in footprint over time after a reboot to weeks
later in use.

I've tracked some of the news around the oomkiller features being added in
systemd, probably needs to be a todo item.  If the system just killed
firefox or whatever the offender was, it'd be fine, but typically my
desktop will just get wonky as I try to figure out what is up, but often
will end up freezing before I can at that point.  Really annoying, as I
tend to lose some unsaved work every time.

Agreed, perhaps just the way I work I *do* need the memory, but I figure
there's got to be some others that do what I do, working on a more standard
system with 8-16gb ram OK, like probably the other 99% of everyone.

-mb


On Sat, Nov 7, 2020 at 7:09 PM Ryan Petris via PLUG-discuss <
plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote:

> I think maybe you're looking at this the wrong way -- what use is having a
> lot of ram if it's not going to be used? This is how the kernel and some
> userspace programs think about it.
>
> When you look at memory usage, how much is actually in use vs cache? Cache
> is the yellow part of the bar in Htop. If there's just a bunch of cache
> used, this is normal as the kernel isn't really going to drop cache unless
> there's a reason to, and it will do so automatically when more memory is
> needed by anything; thus, you shouldn't really look at cache memory as "in
> use".
>
> As for Chrome and possibly Firefox, they use a lot of RAM, yes, however
> they also somehow tell the OOM killer to kill their processes first in the
> even of an OOM condition. Here's a description of how this is handled in
> ChromiumOS however I imagine it's the same in regular Linux:
> https://www.chromium.org/chromium-os/chromiumos-design-docs/out-of-memory-handling
>
> Therefore, unless random programs start getting killed left and right, I
> personally wouldn't worry about it.
>
> On Fri, Nov 6, 2020, at 7:48 AM, Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss wrote:
>
> Memory usage is getting frustrating for me, as whether I use 64gb of ram,
> or 128gb, I still tend to exhaust memory on my system.  My laptop currently
> has 64gb, and started freaking out this morning, to find I was hitting
> oom's again with browsing and some general use as wake up.
>
> Trying to figure out with htop what is using all my memory, firefox was a
> big consumer, using ~25gb of ram once killed.  Yeah, it's like that.
> Chrome was typically worse.  I use 6 profiles, as I have to for different
> companies I consult for, mostly due to different gsuite accounts and
> different o365 accounts that will not play nice in a same profile.  Same
> for Chrome.  I figure I can't be the only person that does this, perhaps
> so, but the memory utilization with with only a few tabs on each is
> astounding.
>
> I tend to run several VM's at a time, a full instance of windoze10 or two
> with 4-8gb of ram work fine.
>
> I use pluma text editor a lot as the gedit fork from mint, which I'll find
> uses 3-4gb of memory with a few dozen text files open.  Of text.  Doesn't
> seem to be worth a few gig of ram.
>
> Libreoffice itself tends to use 3-4gb of memory keeping a dozen or two
> files open, which again flipping between several customers, I tend to work
> on, review, etc constantly.
>
> Even on boot, kde tends to use ~3.5gb of memory, and after running for a
> few week or two, with everything else killed, will start consuming ~9gb
> with nothing else running.  No idea where it goes.
>
> My question is how the heck do others run linux with only 4-8gb of ram on
> a "normal" system?  Most linux users are likely IT professionals like
> myself, just curious what the heck I'm doing wrong.
>
> -mb
>
>
> ---
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>
>
> ---
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: Linux Memory (again)

[Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss]

Inline here:

On Fri, Nov 6, 2020 at 6:28 PM Steve Litt via PLUG-discuss <
plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote:

> On Fri, 6 Nov 2020 07:48:40 -0700
> Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss  wrote:
>
> Chrome/Chromium and Firefox are absolute pigs. I finally tamed Firefox
> ty setting it to drop all cache and other stuff upon exit, and then I
> shut down all instances of Firefox every day.
>

They all are pigs I find.  Tried Brave, Chrome, Chromium, and keep ending
up back at firefox as a lesser of evils.  Chrome is the new IE, so now I
*need* it occasionally for plugins.  I've been using tab suspenders across
each, doesn't help much.

My problem is I have to keep different profiles for different companies I
work with, usually no less than 4-6 at a time, 2 at least for my personal
gsuite and work.  Mostly I do so for M$ O365/Teams, as they can't figure
out how to make it work across organizations or seemingly comprehend why
anyone would.  Hint: Consultants that work for 5-10 orgs at a time.  Each
profile just ends up hoarding ram, which ends up being 30-40gb at times on
my system.

I don't know how many VMs you run, but those eat up memory.
>

I have a mainstream Win10 build with visio and other windoze-y crap I need,
8gb of ram, and keep a few win10 ameliorated editions for clients to
minimize footprint with 4gb.  Usually only 2 windoze, 1 if I can.
Occasionally a few other 2-4gb ram linux systems, but typically ~20gb for
vbox and my vms.  It's where all the other memory goes I have a hard time
with, which I really can't identify.

What the heck kind of editor requires 3-4GB RAM? That sounds crazy to
> me. Why do you have a few dozen files open simultaneously?
>

Fine questions really, this tends to be where I'm bit odd.  I've found
whether using Pluma, Gedit, or even qqnotepad, they all tend to get a bit
crazy with a lot of tabs.  I presume things like undo memory, things like
that are adding up, but I'm still like geez, really?

Why so many?  I mostly do network and security consulting, with config
files from existing devices, resulting operational output extracted in
text, across multiple orgs at a time.  Not to mention configuration changes
I'm making for template deployment off those, so it gets a bit crazy
flipping between dozens of configs at a time.

If I could find better ways to manage some of this, it would be nice, but
seems everything just dumps this sort of thing into memory hoarding.

Libreoffice is kind of a pig. Is there something else you can use? And
> why a dozen or two simultaneous files open? This sounds like a workflow
> nightmare. Do you mean one Libreoffice instance with 24 files open, or
> a bunch of separate Libreoffices in VMs. If the latter, yeah, that's
> going to burn a lot of RAM, even more than one instance with 24
> documents.
>

I often blame Libreoffice, only to kill it with like 20 spreadsheets open,
and 30 write files and find it was using (only) around 4gb of ram.  I take
notes a lot in libre because it's restore on crash has proven pretty
flawless vs., well anything else.  I mostly prefer pluma for text input and
notes, but no good restore.  Tried qqnotepad that had a restore function,
it was highly dysfunctional.


> O, KDE. I call that Krash, Delay, Expand. See
> http://troubleshooters.com/lpm/201202/201202.htm . I use OpenBox, which
> is a low-RAM, just-the-facts window manager. On every machine I ever
> used KDE, performance was bad and on lower RAM machines, things ground
> to a halt.
>
> Gnome and KDE are luxuries for folks with lightning fast processors and
> huge quantities of RAM, who want their computers to perform like a 2015
> computer with 4GB RAM.
>

Yes KDE is a pain, but both pretty and functional.  I like it, though it
friggin' hates me.  Tried Mate/Cinnamon, i3, xfce, others randomly, just
never cared for most.

My work and life on a single pc blend probably too much, but when I still
can't seem to work functionally with 64-128gb of ram that simply no one
else uses but me, I'm like wtf is wrong with my setup.


> I'm running a 2014 computer:
> * AMD A6-6400K APU with Radeon(tm) HD Graphics (dual core)
> - 3.1Ghz dualcore
> * 16GB RAM
> * Openbox with dmenu and UMENU2
>
> With no browsers open, this machine is is snappy as hell. With firefox
> set to dump cache upon exit, as long as I do reasonable housekeeping on
> tabs, and prophylactically close all firefox instances at least once a
> day, everything's pretty good.
>
> That being said, this is a 2014 machine, so I'm soon buying a 3.6 Ghz 6
> core (65 watt) with 64GB RAM. This will give me more latitude in
> running Chromium, which I need for Jitsi, and allow me less stringent
> housekeeping in Firefox.
>

Perhaps this is just the price for working as I do.  I also tend to keep
things open to work perpetually as who needs work/life balance, so purging

Re: Linux Memory (again)

[Ryan Petris via PLUG-discuss]

> Gnome and KDE are luxuries for folks with lightning fast processors and
> huge quantities of RAM, who want their computers to perform like a 2015
> computer with 4GB RAM.

Gnome doesn't use that much RAM at all -- on a system with lots of RAM and when 
running Wayland, I've found that typically about 800MB of RAM is in use total 
once the system is booted. This includes the typical services you'd have 
running for Gnome as well, such as NetworkManager, D-Bus, PulseAudio, etc..

On systems with less RAM, I've seen this get all the way down to a few hundred 
MB after boot.

Additionally, as far as I know, Gnome makes use of the GPU to render the shell 
and other UI elements, and therefore would actually free up the CPU to perform 
other tasks, thus theoretically being faster than something like OpenBox which 
I imagine does not use GPU rendering. That said if you don't have a GPU or have 
to fallback to the VESA driver then you may have a problem. If you have any 
decent GPU though from the last 15 years you should be just fine.

Lastly, if we're ever going to see mass-market usage of Linux, desktop 
environments like Gnome and KDE are going to be the ones to take us there. 
Realistically, no normie coming from Windows/MacOS is going to want to use 
something like OpenBox or other minimal window managers like DWM, i3, etc.. 
They're going to want it to just work, with an interface that has familiar 
concepts to the ones they're used to if it doesn't flat out look like Windows 
or MacOS.

On Fri, Nov 6, 2020, at 6:28 PM, Steve Litt via PLUG-discuss wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Nov 2020 07:48:40 -0700
> Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss  wrote:
> 
> > Memory usage is getting frustrating for me, as whether I use 64gb of
> > ram, or 128gb, I still tend to exhaust memory on my system.  My
> > laptop currently has 64gb, and started freaking out this morning, to
> > find I was hitting oom's again with browsing and some general use as
> > wake up.
> 
> Ouch. I have no problem using 16GB RAM
> 
> > 
> > Trying to figure out with htop what is using all my memory, firefox
> > was a big consumer, using ~25gb of ram once killed.  Yeah, it's like
> > that. Chrome was typically worse.  I use 6 profiles, as I have to for
> > different companies I consult for, mostly due to different gsuite
> > accounts and different o365 accounts that will not play nice in a
> > same profile.  Same for Chrome.  I figure I can't be the only person
> > that does this, perhaps so, but the memory utilization with with only
> > a few tabs on each is astounding.
> 
> Chrome/Chromium and Firefox are absolute pigs. I finally tamed Firefox
> ty setting it to drop all cache and other stuff upon exit, and then I
> shut down all instances of Firefox every day.
> 
> > 
> > I tend to run several VM's at a time, a full instance of windoze10 or
> > two with 4-8gb of ram work fine.
> 
> I don't know how many VMs you run, but those eat up memory.
> 
> > 
> > I use pluma text editor a lot as the gedit fork from mint, which I'll
> > find uses 3-4gb of memory with a few dozen text files open.  Of text.
> >  Doesn't seem to be worth a few gig of ram.
> 
> What the heck kind of editor requires 3-4GB RAM? That sounds crazy to
> me. Why do you have a few dozen files open simultaneously?
> 
> > 
> > Libreoffice itself tends to use 3-4gb of memory keeping a dozen or two
> > files open, which again flipping between several customers, I tend to
> > work on, review, etc constantly.
> 
> Libreoffice is kind of a pig. Is there something else you can use? And
> why a dozen or two simultaneous files open? This sounds like a workflow
> nightmare. Do you mean one Libreoffice instance with 24 files open, or
> a bunch of separate Libreoffices in VMs. If the latter, yeah, that's
> going to burn a lot of RAM, even more than one instance with 24
> documents.
> 
> > 
> > Even on boot, kde tends to use ~3.5gb of memory, and after running
> > for a few week or two, with everything else killed, will start
> > consuming ~9gb with nothing else running.  No idea where it goes.
> 
> O, KDE. I call that Krash, Delay, Expand. See
> http://troubleshooters.com/lpm/201202/201202.htm . I use OpenBox, which
> is a low-RAM, just-the-facts window manager. On every machine I ever
> used KDE, performance was bad and on lower RAM machines, things ground
> to a halt.
> 
> Gnome and KDE are luxuries for folks with lightning fast processors and
> huge quantities of RAM, who want their computers to perform like a 2015
> computer with 4GB RAM.
> 
> 
> 
> > 
> > My question is how the heck do others run linux with only 4-8gb of
> > ram on a "normal" system?  Most linux users are likely I

Re: Linux Memory (again)

[Ryan Petris via PLUG-discuss]

I think maybe you're looking at this the wrong way -- what use is having a lot 
of ram if it's not going to be used? This is how the kernel and some userspace 
programs think about it.

When you look at memory usage, how much is actually in use vs cache? Cache is 
the yellow part of the bar in Htop. If there's just a bunch of cache used, this 
is normal as the kernel isn't really going to drop cache unless there's a 
reason to, and it will do so automatically when more memory is needed by 
anything; thus, you shouldn't really look at cache memory as "in use".

As for Chrome and possibly Firefox, they use a lot of RAM, yes, however they 
also somehow tell the OOM killer to kill their processes first in the even of 
an OOM condition. Here's a description of how this is handled in ChromiumOS 
however I imagine it's the same in regular Linux: 
https://www.chromium.org/chromium-os/chromiumos-design-docs/out-of-memory-handling

Therefore, unless random programs start getting killed left and right, I 
personally wouldn't worry about it.

On Fri, Nov 6, 2020, at 7:48 AM, Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss wrote:
> Memory usage is getting frustrating for me, as whether I use 64gb of ram, or 
> 128gb, I still tend to exhaust memory on my system.  My laptop currently has 
> 64gb, and started freaking out this morning, to find I was hitting oom's 
> again with browsing and some general use as wake up.
> 
> Trying to figure out with htop what is using all my memory, firefox was a big 
> consumer, using ~25gb of ram once killed.  Yeah, it's like that.  Chrome was 
> typically worse.  I use 6 profiles, as I have to for different companies I 
> consult for, mostly due to different gsuite accounts and different o365 
> accounts that will not play nice in a same profile.  Same for Chrome.  I 
> figure I can't be the only person that does this, perhaps so, but the memory 
> utilization with with only a few tabs on each is astounding.
> 
> I tend to run several VM's at a time, a full instance of windoze10 or two 
> with 4-8gb of ram work fine.
> 
> I use pluma text editor a lot as the gedit fork from mint, which I'll find 
> uses 3-4gb of memory with a few dozen text files open.  Of text.  Doesn't 
> seem to be worth a few gig of ram.
> 
> Libreoffice itself tends to use 3-4gb of memory keeping a dozen or two files 
> open, which again flipping between several customers, I tend to work on, 
> review, etc constantly.
> 
> Even on boot, kde tends to use ~3.5gb of memory, and after running for a few 
> week or two, with everything else killed, will start consuming ~9gb with 
> nothing else running.  No idea where it goes.
> 
> My question is how the heck do others run linux with only 4-8gb of ram on a 
> "normal" system?  Most linux users are likely IT professionals like myself, 
> just curious what the heck I'm doing wrong.
> 
> -mb
> 
> 
> ---
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: Linux Memory (again)

[Matt Graham via PLUG-discuss]

On 2020-11-06 18:28, Steve Litt via PLUG-discuss wrote:

On Fri, 6 Nov 2020 07:48:40 -0700
Michael Butash wrote:

Memory usage is getting frustrating for me, as whether I use 64gb of
ram, or 128gb, I still tend to exhaust memory on my system.

Ouch. I have no problem using 16GB RAM



firefox was a big consumer, using ~25gb of ram once killed. Chrome
was typically worse.  I use 6 profiles, as I have to for different
companies I consult for, mostly due to different gsuite
accounts and different o365 accounts


This is definitely not a common thing.  I have never had more than one 
profile.  Then again, I have only worked for one company at a time, 
never 6 at the same time.  Don't you also have something crazy like 4 
monitors at the same time?



Chrome/Chromium and Firefox are absolute pigs. I finally tamed Firefox
by setting it to drop all cache and other stuff upon exit, and then I
shut down all instances of Firefox every day.


While I don't do that, I find I need to do that every week or so.  I 
have noticed that on OS X firefox, any animated GIF displayed in the 
active tab causes CPU usage to skyrocket and the fan to start blowing.  
Guess how many cow-orkers constantly post animated emojis in the work 
Slack instance?



I tend to run several VM's at a time, a full instance of windoze10 or
two with 4-8gb of ram work fine.

I don't know how many VMs you run, but those eat up memory.


A VM by nature can't share any of the RAM its guest OS is running, so 
it's worse than usual.



I use pluma text editor a lot as the gedit fork from mint, which I'll
find uses 3-4gb of memory with a few dozen text files open.

What the heck kind of editor requires 3-4GB RAM? That sounds crazy to
me. Why do you have a few dozen files open simultaneously?


As a counterpoint, kate with 10 files open has an RSS of 132M.  Having 
36 files open in an editor seems a bit crazy to me as well, but I 
usually have 3 to 6 files open in vim, and vim like most text editors 
loads the entire file into memory.  36 files that are all 86M or so 
would easily account for 3G.  Text files that are written by people are 
almost never that large, but log files



Libreoffice is kind of a pig. Is there something else you can use? And
why a dozen or two simultaneous files open? This sounds like a 
workflow

nightmare. Do you mean one Libreoffice instance with 24 files open


That seems the most likely scenario.


Even on boot, kde tends to use ~3.5gb of memory, and after running
for a few week or two, with everything else killed, will start
consuming ~9gb with nothing else running.

O, KDE. I call that Krash, Delay, Expand.


If that writeup is from 2012, it's at least 6 years out of date.

Gnome and KDE are luxuries for folks with lightning fast processors 
and

huge quantities of RAM


2015-vintage machine, 8G.  I started KDE on Oct. 20, and top says 3912 
M used.  Most of this is firefox, not KDE, though.  Maybe this is a 
distro thing?  Gentoo is somewhat more conservative than most distros 
when it comes to versions and features.  Also I've turned baloo off.  I 
don't need "file indexing", I can use grep -r like a normal person.  :-P



My question is how the heck do others run linux with only 4-8gb of
ram on a "normal" system?

I'm running a 2014 computer:
* AMD A6-6400K APU 3.1Ghz dualcore
* 16GB RAM
* Openbox with dmenu and UMENU2

With no browsers open, this machine is is snappy as hell. With firefox
set to dump cache upon exit, as long as I do reasonable housekeeping 
on

tabs, and prophylactically close all firefox instances at least once a
day, everything's pretty good.


AMD FX 3.8 GHz 4-core, 8G, no special handling of firefox.  However, I 
only have one browser profile and generally only one browser window, no 
VMs running, only 1 monitor, and rarely use LibreOffice.  Current GUI 
things are 1 Barrier, 2 Dolphin windows, 2 Gwenview windows, 1 konsole, 
1 kcalc, 1 GNUcash, 1 Gimp, 1 System Settings, 1 Firefox window with 13 
tabs, and the general KDE stuff that runs in the background.  Note that 
YMMV.


--
Crow202 Blog: http://crow202.org/wordpress
There is no Darkness in Eternity
But only Light too dim for us to see.
---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: Linux Memory (again)

[Steve Litt via PLUG-discuss]

On Fri, 6 Nov 2020 20:28:39 -0500
Steve Litt via PLUG-discuss  wrote:

> That being said, this is a 2014 machine, so I'm soon buying a 3.6 Ghz
> 6 core (65 watt) with 64GB RAM. This will give me more latitude in
> running Chromium, which I need for Jitsi, and allow me less stringent
> housekeeping in Firefox.

I just bought all the parts for the machine. It set me back $1900.00
USD before sales tax. All parts from Newegg, and I'll need to put the
whole thing together myself (ugh). But that's the price for getting the
exact machine you want.

SteveT

Steve Litt 
Autumn 2020 featured book: Thriving in Tough Times
http://www.troubleshooters.com/thrive
---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: Linux Memory (again)

[Steve Litt via PLUG-discuss]

On Fri, 6 Nov 2020 07:48:40 -0700
Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss  wrote:

> Memory usage is getting frustrating for me, as whether I use 64gb of
> ram, or 128gb, I still tend to exhaust memory on my system.  My
> laptop currently has 64gb, and started freaking out this morning, to
> find I was hitting oom's again with browsing and some general use as
> wake up.

Ouch. I have no problem using 16GB RAM

> 
> Trying to figure out with htop what is using all my memory, firefox
> was a big consumer, using ~25gb of ram once killed.  Yeah, it's like
> that. Chrome was typically worse.  I use 6 profiles, as I have to for
> different companies I consult for, mostly due to different gsuite
> accounts and different o365 accounts that will not play nice in a
> same profile.  Same for Chrome.  I figure I can't be the only person
> that does this, perhaps so, but the memory utilization with with only
> a few tabs on each is astounding.

Chrome/Chromium and Firefox are absolute pigs. I finally tamed Firefox
ty setting it to drop all cache and other stuff upon exit, and then I
shut down all instances of Firefox every day.

> 
> I tend to run several VM's at a time, a full instance of windoze10 or
> two with 4-8gb of ram work fine.

I don't know how many VMs you run, but those eat up memory.

> 
> I use pluma text editor a lot as the gedit fork from mint, which I'll
> find uses 3-4gb of memory with a few dozen text files open.  Of text.
>  Doesn't seem to be worth a few gig of ram.

What the heck kind of editor requires 3-4GB RAM? That sounds crazy to
me. Why do you have a few dozen files open simultaneously?

> 
> Libreoffice itself tends to use 3-4gb of memory keeping a dozen or two
> files open, which again flipping between several customers, I tend to
> work on, review, etc constantly.

Libreoffice is kind of a pig. Is there something else you can use? And
why a dozen or two simultaneous files open? This sounds like a workflow
nightmare. Do you mean one Libreoffice instance with 24 files open, or
a bunch of separate Libreoffices in VMs. If the latter, yeah, that's
going to burn a lot of RAM, even more than one instance with 24
documents.

> 
> Even on boot, kde tends to use ~3.5gb of memory, and after running
> for a few week or two, with everything else killed, will start
> consuming ~9gb with nothing else running.  No idea where it goes.

O, KDE. I call that Krash, Delay, Expand. See
http://troubleshooters.com/lpm/201202/201202.htm . I use OpenBox, which
is a low-RAM, just-the-facts window manager. On every machine I ever
used KDE, performance was bad and on lower RAM machines, things ground
to a halt.

Gnome and KDE are luxuries for folks with lightning fast processors and
huge quantities of RAM, who want their computers to perform like a 2015
computer with 4GB RAM.



> 
> My question is how the heck do others run linux with only 4-8gb of
> ram on a "normal" system?  Most linux users are likely IT
> professionals like myself, just curious what the heck I'm doing wrong.

I'm running a 2014 computer:
* AMD A6-6400K APU with Radeon(tm) HD Graphics (dual core)
- 3.1Ghz dualcore
* 16GB RAM
* Openbox with dmenu and UMENU2

With no browsers open, this machine is is snappy as hell. With firefox
set to dump cache upon exit, as long as I do reasonable housekeeping on
tabs, and prophylactically close all firefox instances at least once a
day, everything's pretty good.

That being said, this is a 2014 machine, so I'm soon buying a 3.6 Ghz 6
core (65 watt) with 64GB RAM. This will give me more latitude in
running Chromium, which I need for Jitsi, and allow me less stringent
housekeeping in Firefox.
 
SteveT

Steve Litt 
Autumn 2020 featured book: Thriving in Tough Times
http://www.troubleshooters.com/thrive
---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: Linux Memory (again)

[Stephen Partington via PLUG-discuss]

MS does some weird stuff when it comes to memory and will try to push
content to a pagefile before the memory is needed.

As for your concerns Brave might be worth exploring. If I recall correctly
it is chrome/chromium with all the privacy turned on and then some.

On Fri, Nov 6, 2020 at 9:30 AM Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss <
plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote:

> I switched from Chrome (again) to Firefox about 6mo ago, for memory
> reasons, and for their spyware sending everything I do through google.com.
> Not sure firefox is really any better here at least as far as memory
> consumption.
>
> I run things like New Tab Suspender, noscript, ublock origin, etc, so I
> don't suspect these should use nearly as much ram as they do, so I'm
> wondering if browsers have just piggishly outgrown usable footprints?
>
> How does this look under windoze if anyone does the same?  I just use
> windoze vm's mostly as a visio hypervisor and connection to remote
> corporate networks that require os validation (meh, like windoze is ever
> actually secure, dumb corps).
>
> -mb
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 6, 2020 at 8:57 AM Stephen Partington via PLUG-discuss <
> plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote:
>
>> One of the things I have seen is with browsers they have a flexible
>> memory footprint. As such they will look at availability of free ram and
>> kind of bloat to fit in order to cache more and provide a "better" browsing
>> experience.
>>
>> There are some under the hood settings that may allow you to restrict
>> this behavior. Mozilla I found trats each individual profile as its own
>> instance so it swells super fast. Chrome seems to keep multiple profile
>> awareness better and considers all profiles together. Eve though it takes
>> more it usually gives it back more readily.
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 6, 2020, 7:49 AM Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss <
>> plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Memory usage is getting frustrating for me, as whether I use 64gb of
>>> ram, or 128gb, I still tend to exhaust memory on my system.  My laptop
>>> currently has 64gb, and started freaking out this morning, to find I was
>>> hitting oom's again with browsing and some general use as wake up.
>>>
>>> Trying to figure out with htop what is using all my memory, firefox was
>>> a big consumer, using ~25gb of ram once killed.  Yeah, it's like that.
>>> Chrome was typically worse.  I use 6 profiles, as I have to for different
>>> companies I consult for, mostly due to different gsuite accounts and
>>> different o365 accounts that will not play nice in a same profile.  Same
>>> for Chrome.  I figure I can't be the only person that does this, perhaps
>>> so, but the memory utilization with with only a few tabs on each is
>>> astounding.
>>>
>>> I tend to run several VM's at a time, a full instance of windoze10 or
>>> two with 4-8gb of ram work fine.
>>>
>>> I use pluma text editor a lot as the gedit fork from mint, which I'll
>>> find uses 3-4gb of memory with a few dozen text files open.  Of text.
>>> Doesn't seem to be worth a few gig of ram.
>>>
>>> Libreoffice itself tends to use 3-4gb of memory keeping a dozen or two
>>> files open, which again flipping between several customers, I tend to work
>>> on, review, etc constantly.
>>>
>>> Even on boot, kde tends to use ~3.5gb of memory, and after running for a
>>> few week or two, with everything else killed, will start consuming ~9gb
>>> with nothing else running.  No idea where it goes.
>>>
>>> My question is how the heck do others run linux with only 4-8gb of ram
>>> on a "normal" system?  Most linux users are likely IT professionals like
>>> myself, just curious what the heck I'm doing wrong.
>>>
>>> -mb
>>>
>>>
>>> ---
>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>>
>> ---
>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>
> ---
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss



-- 
A mouse trap, placed on top of your alarm clock, will prevent you from
rolling over and going back to sleep after you hit the snooze button.

Stephen
---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: Linux Memory (again)

[Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss]

I switched from Chrome (again) to Firefox about 6mo ago, for memory
reasons, and for their spyware sending everything I do through google.com.
Not sure firefox is really any better here at least as far as memory
consumption.

I run things like New Tab Suspender, noscript, ublock origin, etc, so I
don't suspect these should use nearly as much ram as they do, so I'm
wondering if browsers have just piggishly outgrown usable footprints?

How does this look under windoze if anyone does the same?  I just use
windoze vm's mostly as a visio hypervisor and connection to remote
corporate networks that require os validation (meh, like windoze is ever
actually secure, dumb corps).

-mb


On Fri, Nov 6, 2020 at 8:57 AM Stephen Partington via PLUG-discuss <
plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote:

> One of the things I have seen is with browsers they have a flexible memory
> footprint. As such they will look at availability of free ram and kind of
> bloat to fit in order to cache more and provide a "better" browsing
> experience.
>
> There are some under the hood settings that may allow you to restrict this
> behavior. Mozilla I found trats each individual profile as its own instance
> so it swells super fast. Chrome seems to keep multiple profile awareness
> better and considers all profiles together. Eve though it takes more it
> usually gives it back more readily.
>
> On Fri, Nov 6, 2020, 7:49 AM Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss <
> plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote:
>
>> Memory usage is getting frustrating for me, as whether I use 64gb of ram,
>> or 128gb, I still tend to exhaust memory on my system.  My laptop currently
>> has 64gb, and started freaking out this morning, to find I was hitting
>> oom's again with browsing and some general use as wake up.
>>
>> Trying to figure out with htop what is using all my memory, firefox was a
>> big consumer, using ~25gb of ram once killed.  Yeah, it's like that.
>> Chrome was typically worse.  I use 6 profiles, as I have to for different
>> companies I consult for, mostly due to different gsuite accounts and
>> different o365 accounts that will not play nice in a same profile.  Same
>> for Chrome.  I figure I can't be the only person that does this, perhaps
>> so, but the memory utilization with with only a few tabs on each is
>> astounding.
>>
>> I tend to run several VM's at a time, a full instance of windoze10 or two
>> with 4-8gb of ram work fine.
>>
>> I use pluma text editor a lot as the gedit fork from mint, which I'll
>> find uses 3-4gb of memory with a few dozen text files open.  Of text.
>> Doesn't seem to be worth a few gig of ram.
>>
>> Libreoffice itself tends to use 3-4gb of memory keeping a dozen or two
>> files open, which again flipping between several customers, I tend to work
>> on, review, etc constantly.
>>
>> Even on boot, kde tends to use ~3.5gb of memory, and after running for a
>> few week or two, with everything else killed, will start consuming ~9gb
>> with nothing else running.  No idea where it goes.
>>
>> My question is how the heck do others run linux with only 4-8gb of ram on
>> a "normal" system?  Most linux users are likely IT professionals like
>> myself, just curious what the heck I'm doing wrong.
>>
>> -mb
>>
>>
>> ---
>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>
> ---
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: Linux Memory (again)

[Stephen Partington via PLUG-discuss]

One of the things I have seen is with browsers they have a flexible memory
footprint. As such they will look at availability of free ram and kind of
bloat to fit in order to cache more and provide a "better" browsing
experience.

There are some under the hood settings that may allow you to restrict this
behavior. Mozilla I found trats each individual profile as its own instance
so it swells super fast. Chrome seems to keep multiple profile awareness
better and considers all profiles together. Eve though it takes more it
usually gives it back more readily.

On Fri, Nov 6, 2020, 7:49 AM Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss <
plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote:

> Memory usage is getting frustrating for me, as whether I use 64gb of ram,
> or 128gb, I still tend to exhaust memory on my system.  My laptop currently
> has 64gb, and started freaking out this morning, to find I was hitting
> oom's again with browsing and some general use as wake up.
>
> Trying to figure out with htop what is using all my memory, firefox was a
> big consumer, using ~25gb of ram once killed.  Yeah, it's like that.
> Chrome was typically worse.  I use 6 profiles, as I have to for different
> companies I consult for, mostly due to different gsuite accounts and
> different o365 accounts that will not play nice in a same profile.  Same
> for Chrome.  I figure I can't be the only person that does this, perhaps
> so, but the memory utilization with with only a few tabs on each is
> astounding.
>
> I tend to run several VM's at a time, a full instance of windoze10 or two
> with 4-8gb of ram work fine.
>
> I use pluma text editor a lot as the gedit fork from mint, which I'll find
> uses 3-4gb of memory with a few dozen text files open.  Of text.  Doesn't
> seem to be worth a few gig of ram.
>
> Libreoffice itself tends to use 3-4gb of memory keeping a dozen or two
> files open, which again flipping between several customers, I tend to work
> on, review, etc constantly.
>
> Even on boot, kde tends to use ~3.5gb of memory, and after running for a
> few week or two, with everything else killed, will start consuming ~9gb
> with nothing else running.  No idea where it goes.
>
> My question is how the heck do others run linux with only 4-8gb of ram on
> a "normal" system?  Most linux users are likely IT professionals like
> myself, just curious what the heck I'm doing wrong.
>
> -mb
>
>
> ---
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Linux Memory (again)

[Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss]

Memory usage is getting frustrating for me, as whether I use 64gb of ram,
or 128gb, I still tend to exhaust memory on my system.  My laptop currently
has 64gb, and started freaking out this morning, to find I was hitting
oom's again with browsing and some general use as wake up.

Trying to figure out with htop what is using all my memory, firefox was a
big consumer, using ~25gb of ram once killed.  Yeah, it's like that.
Chrome was typically worse.  I use 6 profiles, as I have to for different
companies I consult for, mostly due to different gsuite accounts and
different o365 accounts that will not play nice in a same profile.  Same
for Chrome.  I figure I can't be the only person that does this, perhaps
so, but the memory utilization with with only a few tabs on each is
astounding.

I tend to run several VM's at a time, a full instance of windoze10 or two
with 4-8gb of ram work fine.

I use pluma text editor a lot as the gedit fork from mint, which I'll find
uses 3-4gb of memory with a few dozen text files open.  Of text.  Doesn't
seem to be worth a few gig of ram.

Libreoffice itself tends to use 3-4gb of memory keeping a dozen or two
files open, which again flipping between several customers, I tend to work
on, review, etc constantly.

Even on boot, kde tends to use ~3.5gb of memory, and after running for a
few week or two, with everything else killed, will start consuming ~9gb
with nothing else running.  No idea where it goes.

My question is how the heck do others run linux with only 4-8gb of ram on a
"normal" system?  Most linux users are likely IT professionals like myself,
just curious what the heck I'm doing wrong.

-mb
---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Browser Memory Madness

[Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss]

Interesting thing today, I noticed my computer going a bit crazy, and
looked at a background htop, found my system running at 58gb of ram usage,
which means, it's about to start OOM'ing.  I just upgraded from 32 to 64gb,
on my laptop, and this is the first uptime since I put in the new ram.

Trying to determine who's using all that from htop is hard, outside of
killing stuff, so I have some scripts I've used for years to kill all the
memory hogs individually.  Here's where I started.

[image: image.png]

I had Chromium open, limited, I moved to firefox, so only a few tabs.
Killing that gave me back like less than a gig back.  Good, because it's
the reason I moved to firefox.

[image: image.png]

Next I killed firefox.  It freed up some 35gb of ram.

[image: image.png]

Restarting Firefox with all 4 profiles, total of 8 windows, and 59 tabs, it
comes back up at 28-29gb of ram.

[image: image.png]

There's a Windoze 10vm still open with 8gb of memory (visio, project), a
ton of libreoffice docs, zoom, slack, teams, and text editors for the rest
of that 23gb of space in use.  This is pretty normal for me.

I sort of laugh when I hear systems using "only* 8gb or 16gb of ram, but
still makes me wonder why linux is such a memory hog and how windoze/mac
seem to make this work.

I hear so often "my computer is slow" or "I have to reboot all the time",
makes me wonder just if some pervasive resource perversion by the browser
vendors.  How do other systems *not* use this sort of memory consumption?
Seems when I open the floodgate with more ram, it just uses more.

-mb
---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: container/VM memory hostside

[Joseph Sinclair]

There are a couple completely different issues in play here, so I'll try to 
detangle this a bit and offer some helpful information.

1) VM (I assume you mean full virtual machine such as VirtualBox, KVM/QEMU, or 
VMWare).
  For these, the vendor of the Hypervisor has a lot of control over what kinds 
of memory access are or are not possible.
  Typically, at least in Linux (Windows HyperV is VERY different), a fully 
virtualized guest is quite isolated from the host running the Hypervisor.
  Any properly written Hypervisor will implement measures to prevent access to 
guest memory from the Host or other VM's on the same Host, but there is only so 
much possible in this regard without severe performance impacts.
  That doesn't prevent the Host from accessing the guest memory, 
anyone/anything with access to the hardware (including virtual hardware) can 
break the security with enough time and effort, but it is definitely not easy.
  BTW, in this situation it doesn't matter who runs the VM; the Hypervisor 
initiates the guest process as a subprocess of its own privileged process, not 
a subprocess owned by the initiating user.  The user-owned process is merely a 
cgroup peer (for resource limits) and VM state control process, not the parent.
  I should also note that some Hypervisors may be configured to take fairly 
extreme measures to prevent host access to guest memory, whether these efforts 
will survive a truly dedicated adversary is not currently known.

2) Container (e.g. LXC, Docker, etc...)
  This is much more nuanced.  You control the level of access to container 
memory when you setup the container namespaces and cgroup, and your setup for 
that process can range from wide-open down to nobody-not-even-me levels 
(although a "real" privileged process at the host level can bypass your setup).
  Default setups are typically reduced to complete isolation, so neither root 
nor the launching user can access the memory (although a privileged process at 
the host level can deliberately violate kernel namespace and process isolation 
to get around that).
  Keep in mind that memory space isolation from process to process is the 
default in Linux, processes *may* have access to child process memory, but not 
always, and processes you run are not necessarily child processes of any 
particular parent (c.f. nohup).
  The rub here is that the kernel controls all of this.  Because the kernel 
mediates and enforces the isolation, anything with privilege enough to run the 
requisite syscalls will be able to breach the inter-process isolation in the 
kernel and inspect memory (or other resources) within the container.
  Generally, containers are best when used to prevent the process within the 
container from accessing the host; not the other way around.
  The setup of the namespaces (which create isolation) and cgroups (which limit 
resource availability) for a container are primarily designed to present a 
restricted "view" of the system to the container, rather than hiding the 
container from the host.

On 2018-05-21 10:32 PM, der.hans wrote:
> moin moin,
> 
> I presume that if you run a container or VM as you on your system you can
> make a copy of its memory from the host system.
> 
> If you run it as root, is root the only user ( outside of escalation
> exploits ) that has access to the memory?
> 
> If you run it as a 3rd party, e.g. myvmuser, then only that user and root
> can inspect the memory from the host side?
> 
> I'm contemplating the security implications of running a security or
> privacy process ( password manager, keyserver, etc. ) in a containerized
> or VM environment rather than just running it as an application on the
> host.
> 
> Security and privacy processes try to lock down the memory on the host
> system, but when the OS is in a sub-process you can dump the entire
> memory.
> 
> In this particular case, I'm not worried about something escaping the
> hosted system, rather I'm concerned about what can spy on the hosted
> system.
> 
> ciao,
> 
> der.hans



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: container/VM memory hostside

[Stephen Partington]

I know most of the top VM companies out have put some significant effort in
preventing vm's from being able to interact/interfere with each other. I am
not as sure about the host vs VM.

On Mon, May 21, 2018, 10:32 PM der.hans <pl...@lufthans.com> wrote:

> moin moin,
>
> I presume that if you run a container or VM as you on your system you can
> make a copy of its memory from the host system.
>
> If you run it as root, is root the only user ( outside of escalation
> exploits ) that has access to the memory?
>
> If you run it as a 3rd party, e.g. myvmuser, then only that user and root
> can inspect the memory from the host side?
>
> I'm contemplating the security implications of running a security or
> privacy process ( password manager, keyserver, etc. ) in a containerized
> or VM environment rather than just running it as an application on the
> host.
>
> Security and privacy processes try to lock down the memory on the host
> system, but when the OS is in a sub-process you can dump the entire
> memory.
>
> In this particular case, I'm not worried about something escaping the
> hosted system, rather I'm concerned about what can spy on the hosted
> system.
>
> ciao,
>
> der.hans
> --
> #  https://www.LuftHans.com   https://www.PhxLinux.org
> #  I'm not anti-social, I'm pro-individual. - der.hans
> ---
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

container/VM memory hostside

[der.hans]

moin moin,

I presume that if you run a container or VM as you on your system you can
make a copy of its memory from the host system.

If you run it as root, is root the only user ( outside of escalation
exploits ) that has access to the memory?

If you run it as a 3rd party, e.g. myvmuser, then only that user and root
can inspect the memory from the host side?

I'm contemplating the security implications of running a security or
privacy process ( password manager, keyserver, etc. ) in a containerized
or VM environment rather than just running it as an application on the
host.

Security and privacy processes try to lock down the memory on the host
system, but when the OS is in a sub-process you can dump the entire
memory.

In this particular case, I'm not worried about something escaping the
hosted system, rather I'm concerned about what can spy on the hosted
system.

ciao,

der.hans
--
#  https://www.LuftHans.com   https://www.PhxLinux.org
#  I'm not anti-social, I'm pro-individual. - der.hans
---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: Y2K was real: was Major Intel Memory Vulnerability

[techlists]

I'm not sure how one can compare Y2K with Meltdown and Spectre.  We know 
there was a point when Y2K would become a problem.  That was 1/1/2000... 
Meltdown and Spectre are different.  Millions of computers and maybe 
even more devices and embedded systems are affected today. We have no 
time to fix.  No fix by date.  The other issue is 18 years ago we were 
just beginning to rely on computers. Today we have a generation that 
does not know what not having computers, cellular, or smart phones would 
be like.  Maybe I am being overly dramatic... However I think Meltdown 
and Spectre are by far bigger than Y2K.


And the solution? Fix a hardware issue with software.  Yikes.  Apply a 
patch that a hacker can remove and apply their's and own a computer or a 
network of computers. Just think of the possibilities.  What if it is a 
computer that manages nuclear launch sequence? Maybe it is your banks 
computer system...  I wish I were naive enough to think everything will 
be ok.


We need to wise up.  We are in a pickle.  We have been in a pickle.  
Look at at the data breaches over the past year.  The Experian data 
breach effects all of us. By the way Experian is a private company that 
holds all your financial data. Sounds like they are violating our 
privacy.  3 or 4 years ago the Maricopa college system was breach. If 
you attended classes or even one class at Maricopa Community College you 
could be effected.  The one I like the most is the guy to took a disk 
home that contained 2.6 million veterans data and his house was 
burglarized and the disk was at large for several days.  We were told no 
one accessed that data. I trust my Government so I am sure they are 
right.


Computers come with a lot of great befits, however there sure seems to 
be a big price for those benefits.





On 2018-01-05 23:48, Steve Litt wrote:

On Fri, 05 Jan 2018 11:27:38 -0700
Eric Oyen <eric.o...@icloud.com> wrote:


oh boy. This sounds like another Y2K problem, only this one has some
reality about it and real consequences.


Y2K was completely real, and would have had real consequences if our
society hadn't taken three years to fix most of it. We were fortunate
that in those days society was willing to put in hard work to fix a
future problem, rather than "kicking the can down the road."

Between 1984 and 1991 I wrote plenty of software using 2 digit years.
So did everyone else. Much of the Cobol from the 1960's onward used 2
digit dates to save memory, which was very precious back then. Much of
that software was still used in 1999, and some is still used today. It
got fixed.

It's speculation what would have happened if our entire society hadn't
pitched in and fixed most software in 1997-1999, but it's my opinion
that if we'd done then what we'd surely do now (call it somebody else's
problem, keep prioritizing our own little lives and those of our
corporations, and do nothing), we'd be bartering gold for tuna and 
water

for bullets.

None of this is to imply that Meltdown and Spectre aren't a very big
deal. Just don't think Y2K was no big deal because we did the necessary
work to fix it proactively.

SteveT

Steve Litt
December 2017 featured book: Thriving in Tough Times
http://www.troubleshooters.com/thrive
---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: Y2K was real: was Major Intel Memory Vulnerability

[Stephen Partington]

The big difference is that was mostly resolved via software. Intel issue is
much harder.

On Jan 5, 2018 11:48 PM, "Steve Litt" <sl...@troubleshooters.com> wrote:

> On Fri, 05 Jan 2018 11:27:38 -0700
> Eric Oyen <eric.o...@icloud.com> wrote:
>
> > oh boy. This sounds like another Y2K problem, only this one has some
> > reality about it and real consequences.
>
> Y2K was completely real, and would have had real consequences if our
> society hadn't taken three years to fix most of it. We were fortunate
> that in those days society was willing to put in hard work to fix a
> future problem, rather than "kicking the can down the road."
>
> Between 1984 and 1991 I wrote plenty of software using 2 digit years.
> So did everyone else. Much of the Cobol from the 1960's onward used 2
> digit dates to save memory, which was very precious back then. Much of
> that software was still used in 1999, and some is still used today. It
> got fixed.
>
> It's speculation what would have happened if our entire society hadn't
> pitched in and fixed most software in 1997-1999, but it's my opinion
> that if we'd done then what we'd surely do now (call it somebody else's
> problem, keep prioritizing our own little lives and those of our
> corporations, and do nothing), we'd be bartering gold for tuna and water
> for bullets.
>
> None of this is to imply that Meltdown and Spectre aren't a very big
> deal. Just don't think Y2K was no big deal because we did the necessary
> work to fix it proactively.
>
> SteveT
>
> Steve Litt
> December 2017 featured book: Thriving in Tough Times
> http://www.troubleshooters.com/thrive
> ---
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Y2K was real: was Major Intel Memory Vulnerability

[Steve Litt]

On Fri, 05 Jan 2018 11:27:38 -0700
Eric Oyen <eric.o...@icloud.com> wrote:

> oh boy. This sounds like another Y2K problem, only this one has some
> reality about it and real consequences.

Y2K was completely real, and would have had real consequences if our
society hadn't taken three years to fix most of it. We were fortunate
that in those days society was willing to put in hard work to fix a
future problem, rather than "kicking the can down the road."

Between 1984 and 1991 I wrote plenty of software using 2 digit years.
So did everyone else. Much of the Cobol from the 1960's onward used 2
digit dates to save memory, which was very precious back then. Much of
that software was still used in 1999, and some is still used today. It
got fixed.

It's speculation what would have happened if our entire society hadn't
pitched in and fixed most software in 1997-1999, but it's my opinion
that if we'd done then what we'd surely do now (call it somebody else's
problem, keep prioritizing our own little lives and those of our
corporations, and do nothing), we'd be bartering gold for tuna and water
for bullets.

None of this is to imply that Meltdown and Spectre aren't a very big
deal. Just don't think Y2K was no big deal because we did the necessary
work to fix it proactively.

SteveT

Steve Litt 
December 2017 featured book: Thriving in Tough Times
http://www.troubleshooters.com/thrive
---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: OT: Major Intel Memory Vulnerability - worse than Y2K?

[Eric Oyen]

well, that was a known factor well ahead of time. This situation is different. 
Intel KNEW there might be a problem with this method of memory processing. They 
just didn't know how big a problem it could turn out to be. And all of these 
chips are in everything from routers, to servers to switches and even devices 
used in the smart home. That is slightly more than $3 trillion worth of 
infrastructure and commodity equippment that many consumers have bought since 
then. This includes smart phones (which can be as expensive as $1,000 a throw). 
That's a hell of a lot of exposure that Intel will have to deal with and they 
don't have nearly enough capital to even touch a small part of this mess.

-eric
from the central offices of the Technomage Guild, "The world does not die with 
a bang, but a whimper" dept.

On Jan 5, 2018, at 12:06 PM, Victor Odhner wrote:

> So, Eric — You don’t think Y2K had consequences?
> :)
> 
> It just happened to be a raft of stupid bugs that the industry dealt with in 
> time.
> I was coding around Y2K bugs as early as 1979, as were lots of other people, 
> just matter of factly planning on Y2K, but some of the older and more 
> primitive stuff wasn’t being looked at until the late 1990s, and lots of 
> production lines would have gone nuts.
> 
> As for how much damage this year's vulnerability will do, yeah, strap in for 
> the ride. Hopefully it will help people think about Internet of Things. 
> (Banned from my house, as much as possible, but I can’t control my Vizio TV.)
> 
> And self-driving cars are going to be scarey, but I’ll need a driver in 
> another 10 years if I’m still around. I might already be more dangerous 
> behind the wheel than a compromised automatic driver . . . . But I agree with 
> Stephen, at least they need an air gap between the Internet and the robotic 
> driver.
> 
> Even then, some rich kids *will* get kidnapped on the way to school by their 
> hacked chauffeur-bots, it’s bound to happen, too obvious. And remember the TV 
> series “Extant,” where the top robotics guy was assassinated by the central 
> computer which locked him in his car on the railroad track. (I’m sorry, 
> Dave….)
> __
> 
> On 20180105, at 11:27, Eric Oyen <eric.o...@icloud.com> wrote:
> 
> oh boy. This sounds like another Y2K problem, only this one has some reality 
> about it and real consequences.
> 
> -eric
> from the central offices of the Technomage Guild, Truth or Consequences Dept.
> 
> 
> ---
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: Major Intel Memory Vulnerability

[techlists]

I think my next car will be some old iron without any of the modern
electronic 

On 2018-01-05 11:40, Stephen Partington wrote:

> I still do not want my car to be the massively online thing that car makers 
> seem to think is the bes thing ever. cause they have no clue what security 
> is. 
> 
> Leave my car dumb, gime a bluetooth interface to my phone and leave me be... 
> 
> And get off my lawn :-P 
> 
> On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 10:47 AM, der.hans  wrote:
> Am 05. Jan, 2018 schwätzte Stephen Partington so:
> 
> It is certainly a deciding factor in my desire to move to AMD on my CPU
> rollout. Trying to imagine a car salesperson knowing which CPUs are in a 
> particular
> model and utterfly failing.
> 
> Luckily IoT generally has so many holes that we don't need to worry about
> meltdown and spectre for them...
> 
> ciao,
> 
> der.hans
> 
> On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 9:39 AM,  wrote:
> 
> I think they have a moral obligation to destroy all effected chips that
> are in the pipeline.  Dell and others need to stop sales and not continue
> selling until the CPU is fixed.
> 
> This is much bigger than we know.  Almost every computer is effected.  The
> intermittent fix is software.  What keeps some smart and devious person
> from creating an app that replaced the patch with their own and then they
> can drain your bank account... crash your automated or self driving car
> Yikes.
> 
> The real solution is a new generation of chips that are not exploitable.
> That means replacing every computer and device that is effected.
> 
> This should be a wake up call to all of us.  We are way too dependent on
> computers.
> 
> There will be major fireworks over this.  I can see a lot of companies
> getting sued.  And the only ones that win are the lawyers.
> 
> This is going to be with us for years.
> 
> I have 7 computers that can be or already are connected to the internet.
> A lot of it is old technology, however it's value is in testing.  I am a
> software developer.  As long as I keep them on a private net I am ok
> Otherwise I will need to replace at least 2.
> 
> This is a potential nightmare Patching hardware with software is a
> weak plan.  All that need to happen is some wise person to figure out how
> to replace the patch with their own.  Say good by to our economy if that
> happens.
> 
> What a mess!!
> 
> On 2018-01-03 18:12, Matthew Crews wrote:
> 
> I would be more concerned IF the next gen CPU has this fixed. All's I know
> is that if Intel wants to fix the very next gen, they will need to scrap a
> lot of silicon that has already been finished.
> 
> Sent from ProtonMail , Swiss-based encrypted 
> 
> email.
> 
>  Original Message 
> On Jan 3, 2018, 15:35, Nathan O'Brennan wrote:
> 
> I'm more curious to know which versions of Intel's upcoming chips have
> been fixed already. I would like to upgrade my current workstation in the
> next year and will stick with Intel despite any performance impact over AMD.
> 
> On 2018-01-03 00:43, Aaron Jones wrote:
> 
> I read the performance hit for Intel chips will be %35 or so after the
> fix.
> 
> On Jan 2, 2018, at 7:49 PM, Eric Oyen  wrote:
> 
> so, does this mean that the UEFI might get patched first? OR, does the OS
> ecology have to do so first? Lastly, how much of a performance hit will
> this represent?
> 
> -eric
> from the central offices of the Technomage Guild, the "oh look! yet
> another bug!" Dept.
> 
> On Jan 2, 2018, at 3:39 PM, Matthew Crews wrote:
> 
> https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/01/02/intel_cpu_design_flaw/ [1]
> 
> In a nutshell, it is a major security flaw in Intel hardware dating back a
> decade that is requiring a complete kernel rewrite for every major OS
> (Linux, Windows, Mac, etc) in order to patch out. It cannot be patched out
> with a CPU microcode update. Major enough that code comments are redacted
> in the patches until an embargo period is expired. Also the reported fix
> will have a huge performance impact.
> 
> Also crucial to note is that AMD chips are not affected by this.
> 
> How the heck does something like this go unnoticed for so long?
> 
> Sent from ProtonMail , Swiss-based encrypted
> email.
> 
> ---
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss [2]
> 
> ---
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss [2]
> 
> ---
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> 

OT: Major Intel Memory Vulnerability - worse than Y2K?

[Victor Odhner]

So, Eric — You don’t think Y2K had consequences?
:)

It just happened to be a raft of stupid bugs that the industry dealt with in 
time.
I was coding around Y2K bugs as early as 1979, as were lots of other people, 
just matter of factly planning on Y2K, but some of the older and more primitive 
stuff wasn’t being looked at until the late 1990s, and lots of production lines 
would have gone nuts.

As for how much damage this year's vulnerability will do, yeah, strap in for 
the ride. Hopefully it will help people think about Internet of Things. (Banned 
from my house, as much as possible, but I can’t control my Vizio TV.)

And self-driving cars are going to be scarey, but I’ll need a driver in another 
10 years if I’m still around. I might already be more dangerous behind the 
wheel than a compromised automatic driver . . . . But I agree with Stephen, at 
least they need an air gap between the Internet and the robotic driver.

Even then, some rich kids *will* get kidnapped on the way to school by their 
hacked chauffeur-bots, it’s bound to happen, too obvious. And remember the TV 
series “Extant,” where the top robotics guy was assassinated by the central 
computer which locked him in his car on the railroad track. (I’m sorry, Dave….)
__

On 20180105, at 11:27, Eric Oyen  wrote:

oh boy. This sounds like another Y2K problem, only this one has some reality 
about it and real consequences.

-eric
from the central offices of the Technomage Guild, Truth or Consequences Dept.


---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: Major Intel Memory Vulnerability

[sesso]

Spectre also affected AMD. Nobody is safe. 

Regards,

Jason

From: Stephen Partington <cryptwo...@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, January 5, 2018 11:40 AM
To: Main PLUG discussion list
Subject: Re: Major Intel Memory Vulnerability

​I still do not want my car to be the massively online thing that car makers 
seem to think is the bes thing ever. cause they have no clue what security is.​

Leave my car dumb, gime a bluetooth interface to my phone and leave me be...


And get off my lawn :-P

On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 10:47 AM, der.hans <pl...@lufthans.com> wrote:
>
> Am 05. Jan, 2018 schwätzte Stephen Partington so:
>
>> It is certainly a deciding factor in my desire to move to AMD on my CPU
>> rollout.
>
>
> Trying to imagine a car salesperson knowing which CPUs are in a particular
> model and utterfly failing.
>
> Luckily IoT generally has so many holes that we don't need to worry about
> meltdown and spectre for them...
>
> ciao,
>
> der.hans
>
>> On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 9:39 AM, <techli...@phpcoderusa.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I think they have a moral obligation to destroy all effected chips that
>>> are in the pipeline.  Dell and others need to stop sales and not continue
>>> selling until the CPU is fixed.
>>>
>>> This is much bigger than we know.  Almost every computer is effected.  The
>>> intermittent fix is software.  What keeps some smart and devious person
>>> from creating an app that replaced the patch with their own and then they
>>> can drain your bank account... crash your automated or self driving car
>>> Yikes.
>>>
>>> The real solution is a new generation of chips that are not exploitable.
>>> That means replacing every computer and device that is effected.
>>>
>>> This should be a wake up call to all of us.  We are way too dependent on
>>> computers.
>>>
>>> There will be major fireworks over this.  I can see a lot of companies
>>> getting sued.  And the only ones that win are the lawyers.
>>>
>>> This is going to be with us for years.
>>>
>>> I have 7 computers that can be or already are connected to the internet.
>>> A lot of it is old technology, however it's value is in testing.  I am a
>>> software developer.  As long as I keep them on a private net I am ok
>>> Otherwise I will need to replace at least 2.
>>>
>>> This is a potential nightmare Patching hardware with software is a
>>> weak plan.  All that need to happen is some wise person to figure out how
>>> to replace the patch with their own.  Say good by to our economy if that
>>> happens.
>>>
>>> What a mess!!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2018-01-03 18:12, Matthew Crews wrote:
>>>
>>> I would be more concerned IF the next gen CPU has this fixed. All's I know
>>> is that if Intel wants to fix the very next gen, they will need to scrap a
>>> lot of silicon that has already been finished.
>>>
>>>
>>> Sent from ProtonMail <https://protonmail.com>, Swiss-based encrypted
>>>
>>> email.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>  Original Message 
>>> On Jan 3, 2018, 15:35, Nathan O'Brennan wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm more curious to know which versions of Intel's upcoming chips have
>>> been fixed already. I would like to upgrade my current workstation in the
>>> next year and will stick with Intel despite any performance impact over AMD.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2018-01-03 00:43, Aaron Jones wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> I read the performance hit for Intel chips will be %35 or so after the
>>> fix.
>>>
>>> On Jan 2, 2018, at 7:49 PM, Eric Oyen <eric.o...@icloud.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> so, does this mean that the UEFI might get patched first? OR, does the OS
>>> ecology have to do so first? Lastly, how much of a performance hit will
>>> this represent?
>>>
>>> -eric
>>> from the central offices of the Technomage Guild, the "oh look! yet
>>> another bug!" Dept.
>>>
>>> On Jan 2, 2018, at 3:39 PM, Matthew Crews wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/01/02/intel_cpu_design_flaw/
>>>
>>> In a nutshell, it is a major security flaw in Intel hardware dating back a
>>> decade that is requiring a complete kernel rewrite for every ma

Re: Major Intel Memory Vulnerability

[Stephen Partington]

​I still do not want my car to be the massively online thing that car
makers seem to think is the bes thing ever. cause they have no clue what
security is.​

Leave my car dumb, gime a bluetooth interface to my phone and leave me be...


And get off my lawn :-P

On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 10:47 AM, der.hans  wrote:

> Am 05. Jan, 2018 schwätzte Stephen Partington so:
>
> It is certainly a deciding factor in my desire to move to AMD on my CPU
>> rollout.
>>
>
> Trying to imagine a car salesperson knowing which CPUs are in a particular
> model and utterfly failing.
>
> Luckily IoT generally has so many holes that we don't need to worry about
> meltdown and spectre for them...
>
> ciao,
>
> der.hans
>
> On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 9:39 AM,  wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I think they have a moral obligation to destroy all effected chips that
>>> are in the pipeline.  Dell and others need to stop sales and not continue
>>> selling until the CPU is fixed.
>>>
>>> This is much bigger than we know.  Almost every computer is effected.
>>> The
>>> intermittent fix is software.  What keeps some smart and devious person
>>> from creating an app that replaced the patch with their own and then they
>>> can drain your bank account... crash your automated or self driving
>>> car
>>> Yikes.
>>>
>>> The real solution is a new generation of chips that are not exploitable.
>>> That means replacing every computer and device that is effected.
>>>
>>> This should be a wake up call to all of us.  We are way too dependent on
>>> computers.
>>>
>>> There will be major fireworks over this.  I can see a lot of companies
>>> getting sued.  And the only ones that win are the lawyers.
>>>
>>> This is going to be with us for years.
>>>
>>> I have 7 computers that can be or already are connected to the internet.
>>> A lot of it is old technology, however it's value is in testing.  I am a
>>> software developer.  As long as I keep them on a private net I am ok
>>> Otherwise I will need to replace at least 2.
>>>
>>> This is a potential nightmare Patching hardware with software is a
>>> weak plan.  All that need to happen is some wise person to figure out how
>>> to replace the patch with their own.  Say good by to our economy if that
>>> happens.
>>>
>>> What a mess!!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2018-01-03 18:12, Matthew Crews wrote:
>>>
>>> I would be more concerned IF the next gen CPU has this fixed. All's I
>>> know
>>> is that if Intel wants to fix the very next gen, they will need to scrap
>>> a
>>> lot of silicon that has already been finished.
>>>
>>>
>>> Sent from ProtonMail , Swiss-based encrypted
>>>
>>> email.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>  Original Message 
>>> On Jan 3, 2018, 15:35, Nathan O'Brennan wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm more curious to know which versions of Intel's upcoming chips have
>>> been fixed already. I would like to upgrade my current workstation in the
>>> next year and will stick with Intel despite any performance impact over
>>> AMD.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2018-01-03 00:43, Aaron Jones wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> I read the performance hit for Intel chips will be %35 or so after the
>>> fix.
>>>
>>> On Jan 2, 2018, at 7:49 PM, Eric Oyen  wrote:
>>>
>>> so, does this mean that the UEFI might get patched first? OR, does the OS
>>> ecology have to do so first? Lastly, how much of a performance hit will
>>> this represent?
>>>
>>> -eric
>>> from the central offices of the Technomage Guild, the "oh look! yet
>>> another bug!" Dept.
>>>
>>> On Jan 2, 2018, at 3:39 PM, Matthew Crews wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/01/02/intel_cpu_design_flaw/
>>>
>>> In a nutshell, it is a major security flaw in Intel hardware dating back
>>> a
>>> decade that is requiring a complete kernel rewrite for every major OS
>>> (Linux, Windows, Mac, etc) in order to patch out. It cannot be patched
>>> out
>>> with a CPU microcode update. Major enough that code comments are redacted
>>> in the patches until an embargo period is expired. Also the reported fix
>>> will have a huge performance impact.
>>>
>>> Also crucial to note is that AMD chips are not affected by this.
>>>
>>> How the heck does something like this go unnoticed for so long?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Sent from ProtonMail , Swiss-based encrypted
>>> email.
>>>
>>>
>>> ---
>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
>>> http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ---
>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
>>> http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>>>
>>>
>>> ---
>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - 

Re: Major Intel Memory Vulnerability

[Eric Oyen]

oh boy. This sounds like another Y2K problem, only this one has some reality 
about it and real consequences.

-eric
from the central offices of the Technomage Guild, Truth or Consequences Dept.

On Jan 5, 2018, at 9:39 AM, techli...@phpcoderusa.com wrote:

> 
> I think they have a moral obligation to destroy all effected chips that are 
> in the pipeline.  Dell and others need to stop sales and not continue selling 
> until the CPU is fixed.
> 
> This is much bigger than we know.  Almost every computer is effected.  The 
> intermittent fix is software.  What keeps some smart and devious person from 
> creating an app that replaced the patch with their own and then they can 
> drain your bank account... crash your automated or self driving car Yikes.
> 
> The real solution is a new generation of chips that are not exploitable.  
> That means replacing every computer and device that is effected.  
> 
> This should be a wake up call to all of us.  We are way too dependent on 
> computers.
> 
> There will be major fireworks over this.  I can see a lot of companies 
> getting sued.  And the only ones that win are the lawyers.  
> 
> This is going to be with us for years.
> 
> I have 7 computers that can be or already are connected to the internet.  A 
> lot of it is old technology, however it's value is in testing.  I am a 
> software developer.  As long as I keep them on a private net I am ok 
> Otherwise I will need to replace at least 2.  
> 
> This is a potential nightmare Patching hardware with software is a weak 
> plan.  All that need to happen is some wise person to figure out how to 
> replace the patch with their own.  Say good by to our economy if that happens.
> 
> What a mess!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> On 2018-01-03 18:12, Matthew Crews wrote:
> 
>> I would be more concerned IF the next gen CPU has this fixed. All's I know 
>> is that if Intel wants to fix the very next gen, they will need to scrap a 
>> lot of silicon that has already been finished.
>> 
>> 
>> Sent from ProtonMail, Swiss-based encrypted email.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>  Original Message 
>> On Jan 3, 2018, 15:35, Nathan O'Brennan wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> I'm more curious to know which versions of Intel's upcoming chips have been 
>> fixed already. I would like to upgrade my current workstation in the next 
>> year and will stick with Intel despite any performance impact over AMD.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 2018-01-03 00:43, Aaron Jones wrote:
>> 
>>  
>> I read the performance hit for Intel chips will be %35 or so after the fix. 
>> 
>> On Jan 2, 2018, at 7:49 PM, Eric Oyen  wrote:
>> 
>> so, does this mean that the UEFI might get patched first? OR, does the OS 
>> ecology have to do so first? Lastly, how much of a performance hit will this 
>> represent?
>>  
>> -eric
>> from the central offices of the Technomage Guild, the "oh look! yet another 
>> bug!" Dept.
>> 
>> On Jan 2, 2018, at 3:39 PM, Matthew Crews wrote:
>> 
>> https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/01/02/intel_cpu_design_flaw/
>> 
>> In a nutshell, it is a major security flaw in Intel hardware dating back a 
>> decade that is requiring a complete kernel rewrite for every major OS 
>> (Linux, Windows, Mac, etc) in order to patch out. It cannot be patched out 
>> with a CPU microcode update. Major enough that code comments are redacted in 
>> the patches until an embargo period is expired. Also the reported fix will 
>> have a huge performance impact.
>> 
>> Also crucial to note is that AMD chips are not affected by this.
>> 
>> How the heck does something like this go unnoticed for so long?
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Sent from ProtonMail, Swiss-based encrypted email.
>> 
>> 
>> ---
>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
>> http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ---
>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
>> http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
> ---
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: Major Intel Memory Vulnerability

[der.hans]

Am 05. Jan, 2018 schwätzte Stephen Partington so:


It is certainly a deciding factor in my desire to move to AMD on my CPU
rollout.


Trying to imagine a car salesperson knowing which CPUs are in a particular
model and utterfly failing.

Luckily IoT generally has so many holes that we don't need to worry about
meltdown and spectre for them...

ciao,

der.hans


On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 9:39 AM,  wrote:



I think they have a moral obligation to destroy all effected chips that
are in the pipeline.  Dell and others need to stop sales and not continue
selling until the CPU is fixed.

This is much bigger than we know.  Almost every computer is effected.  The
intermittent fix is software.  What keeps some smart and devious person
from creating an app that replaced the patch with their own and then they
can drain your bank account... crash your automated or self driving car
Yikes.

The real solution is a new generation of chips that are not exploitable.
That means replacing every computer and device that is effected.

This should be a wake up call to all of us.  We are way too dependent on
computers.

There will be major fireworks over this.  I can see a lot of companies
getting sued.  And the only ones that win are the lawyers.

This is going to be with us for years.

I have 7 computers that can be or already are connected to the internet.
A lot of it is old technology, however it's value is in testing.  I am a
software developer.  As long as I keep them on a private net I am ok
Otherwise I will need to replace at least 2.

This is a potential nightmare Patching hardware with software is a
weak plan.  All that need to happen is some wise person to figure out how
to replace the patch with their own.  Say good by to our economy if that
happens.

What a mess!!






On 2018-01-03 18:12, Matthew Crews wrote:

I would be more concerned IF the next gen CPU has this fixed. All's I know
is that if Intel wants to fix the very next gen, they will need to scrap a
lot of silicon that has already been finished.


Sent from ProtonMail , Swiss-based encrypted
email.





 Original Message 
On Jan 3, 2018, 15:35, Nathan O'Brennan wrote:


I'm more curious to know which versions of Intel's upcoming chips have
been fixed already. I would like to upgrade my current workstation in the
next year and will stick with Intel despite any performance impact over AMD.



On 2018-01-03 00:43, Aaron Jones wrote:


I read the performance hit for Intel chips will be %35 or so after the
fix.

On Jan 2, 2018, at 7:49 PM, Eric Oyen  wrote:

so, does this mean that the UEFI might get patched first? OR, does the OS
ecology have to do so first? Lastly, how much of a performance hit will
this represent?

-eric
from the central offices of the Technomage Guild, the "oh look! yet
another bug!" Dept.

On Jan 2, 2018, at 3:39 PM, Matthew Crews wrote:


https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/01/02/intel_cpu_design_flaw/

In a nutshell, it is a major security flaw in Intel hardware dating back a
decade that is requiring a complete kernel rewrite for every major OS
(Linux, Windows, Mac, etc) in order to patch out. It cannot be patched out
with a CPU microcode update. Major enough that code comments are redacted
in the patches until an embargo period is expired. Also the reported fix
will have a huge performance impact.

Also crucial to note is that AMD chips are not affected by this.

How the heck does something like this go unnoticed for so long?




Sent from ProtonMail , Swiss-based encrypted
email.


---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss



---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss


---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss








--
#  https://www.LuftHans.com   https://www.PhxLinux.org
#  The Internet is the front line of the battle
#  to protect our freedom. -- Nathaniel Borenstein---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: Major Intel Memory Vulnerability

[Matthew Crews]

>From: techli...@phpcoderusa.com
>I think they have a moral obligation to destroy all effected chips that are in 
>the pipeline.  Dell and others need to stop sales and not continue selling 
>until the CPU is fixed.

Not happening. Nor is Intel issuing a recall.
https://www.cnet.com/news/meltdown-spectre-intel-ceo-no-recall-chip-processor/

>This is much bigger than we know.  Almost every computer is effected.  The 
>intermittent fix is software.  What keeps some smart and devious person from 
>creating an app that replaced the patch with their own and then they can drain 
>your bank account... crash your automated or self driving car Yikes.
>
>The real solution is a new generation of chips that are not exploitable.  That 
>means replacing every computer and device that is effected.  

Intel claims that they are issuing firmware and microcode updates that patch 
Spectre and Meltdown, though I am highly suspicious that it is possible without 
a complete hardware redesign.

>There will be major fireworks over this.  I can see a lot of companies getting 
>sued.  And the only ones that win are the lawyers.  

Already happening.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/jan/05/intel-class-action-lawsuits-meltdown-spectre-bugs-computer

>This is going to be with us for years.

Not denying it, but this also illustrates the serious problem with the whole 
"Internet of Things" ecosystem we find ourselves in. Today it is Intel CPUs, 
while yesterday it was your car. Tomorrow it could be your pacemaker or your 
life support system if you are in a hospital.
---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: Major Intel Memory Vulnerability

[Stephen Partington]

It is certainly a deciding factor in my desire to move to AMD on my CPU
rollout.

On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 9:39 AM,  wrote:

>
> I think they have a moral obligation to destroy all effected chips that
> are in the pipeline.  Dell and others need to stop sales and not continue
> selling until the CPU is fixed.
>
> This is much bigger than we know.  Almost every computer is effected.  The
> intermittent fix is software.  What keeps some smart and devious person
> from creating an app that replaced the patch with their own and then they
> can drain your bank account... crash your automated or self driving car
> Yikes.
>
> The real solution is a new generation of chips that are not exploitable.
> That means replacing every computer and device that is effected.
>
> This should be a wake up call to all of us.  We are way too dependent on
> computers.
>
> There will be major fireworks over this.  I can see a lot of companies
> getting sued.  And the only ones that win are the lawyers.
>
> This is going to be with us for years.
>
> I have 7 computers that can be or already are connected to the internet.
> A lot of it is old technology, however it's value is in testing.  I am a
> software developer.  As long as I keep them on a private net I am ok
> Otherwise I will need to replace at least 2.
>
> This is a potential nightmare Patching hardware with software is a
> weak plan.  All that need to happen is some wise person to figure out how
> to replace the patch with their own.  Say good by to our economy if that
> happens.
>
> What a mess!!
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 2018-01-03 18:12, Matthew Crews wrote:
>
> I would be more concerned IF the next gen CPU has this fixed. All's I know
> is that if Intel wants to fix the very next gen, they will need to scrap a
> lot of silicon that has already been finished.
>
>
> Sent from ProtonMail , Swiss-based encrypted
> email.
>
>
>
>
>
>  Original Message 
> On Jan 3, 2018, 15:35, Nathan O'Brennan wrote:
>
>
> I'm more curious to know which versions of Intel's upcoming chips have
> been fixed already. I would like to upgrade my current workstation in the
> next year and will stick with Intel despite any performance impact over AMD.
>
>
>
> On 2018-01-03 00:43, Aaron Jones wrote:
>
>
> I read the performance hit for Intel chips will be %35 or so after the
> fix.
>
> On Jan 2, 2018, at 7:49 PM, Eric Oyen  wrote:
>
> so, does this mean that the UEFI might get patched first? OR, does the OS
> ecology have to do so first? Lastly, how much of a performance hit will
> this represent?
>
> -eric
> from the central offices of the Technomage Guild, the "oh look! yet
> another bug!" Dept.
>
> On Jan 2, 2018, at 3:39 PM, Matthew Crews wrote:
>
>
> https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/01/02/intel_cpu_design_flaw/
>
> In a nutshell, it is a major security flaw in Intel hardware dating back a
> decade that is requiring a complete kernel rewrite for every major OS
> (Linux, Windows, Mac, etc) in order to patch out. It cannot be patched out
> with a CPU microcode update. Major enough that code comments are redacted
> in the patches until an embargo period is expired. Also the reported fix
> will have a huge performance impact.
>
> Also crucial to note is that AMD chips are not affected by this.
>
> How the heck does something like this go unnoticed for so long?
>
>
>
>
> Sent from ProtonMail , Swiss-based encrypted
> email.
>
>
> ---
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>
>
>
> ---
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>
>
> ---
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>



-- 
A mouse trap, placed on top of your alarm clock, will prevent you from
rolling over and going back to sleep after you hit the snooze button.

Stephen
---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: Major Intel Memory Vulnerability

[techlists]

I think they have a moral obligation to destroy all effected chips that
are in the pipeline.  Dell and others need to stop sales and not
continue selling until the CPU is fixed. 

This is much bigger than we know.  Almost every computer is effected. 
The intermittent fix is software.  What keeps some smart and devious
person from creating an app that replaced the patch with their own and
then they can drain your bank account... crash your automated or self
driving car Yikes. 

The real solution is a new generation of chips that are not exploitable.
 That means replacing every computer and device that is effected.   

This should be a wake up call to all of us.  We are way too dependent on
computers. 

There will be major fireworks over this.  I can see a lot of companies
getting sued.  And the only ones that win are the lawyers.   

This is going to be with us for years. 

I have 7 computers that can be or already are connected to the internet.
 A lot of it is old technology, however it's value is in testing.  I am
a software developer.  As long as I keep them on a private net I am
ok Otherwise I will need to replace at least 2.   

This is a potential nightmare Patching hardware with software is a
weak plan.  All that need to happen is some wise person to figure out
how to replace the patch with their own.  Say good by to our economy if
that happens. 

What a mess!! 

On 2018-01-03 18:12, Matthew Crews wrote:

> I would be more concerned IF the next gen CPU has this fixed. All's I know is 
> that if Intel wants to fix the very next gen, they will need to scrap a lot 
> of silicon that has already been finished.
> 
> Sent from ProtonMail [1], Swiss-based encrypted email.
> 
>  Original Message 
> On Jan 3, 2018, 15:35, Nathan O'Brennan wrote: 
> 
> I'm more curious to know which versions of Intel's upcoming chips have been 
> fixed already. I would like to upgrade my current workstation in the next 
> year and will stick with Intel despite any performance impact over AMD. 
> 
> On 2018-01-03 00:43, Aaron Jones wrote: 
> 
> I read the performance hit for Intel chips will be %35 or so after the fix.  
> 
> On Jan 2, 2018, at 7:49 PM, Eric Oyen  wrote:
> 
> so, does this mean that the UEFI might get patched first? OR, does the OS 
> ecology have to do so first? Lastly, how much of a performance hit will this 
> represent? 
> 
> -eric 
> from the central offices of the Technomage Guild, the "oh look! yet another 
> bug!" Dept. 
> 
> On Jan 2, 2018, at 3:39 PM, Matthew Crews wrote: 
> https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/01/02/intel_cpu_design_flaw/
> 
> In a nutshell, it is a major security flaw in Intel hardware dating back a 
> decade that is requiring a complete kernel rewrite for every major OS (Linux, 
> Windows, Mac, etc) in order to patch out. It cannot be patched out with a CPU 
> microcode update. Major enough that code comments are redacted in the patches 
> until an embargo period is expired. Also the reported fix will have a huge 
> performance impact.
> 
> Also crucial to note is that AMD chips are not affected by this.
> 
> How the heck does something like this go unnoticed for so long?
> 
> Sent from ProtonMail [2], Swiss-based encrypted email.

---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss 

---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss 

Links:
--
[1] https://protonmail.com
[2] https://protonmail.com/---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: Major Intel Memory Vulnerability

[Jerry Snitselaar]

On Thu Jan 04 18, der.hans wrote:

Am 03. Jan, 2018 schwätzte Matthew Crews so:

moin moin,

good writeup on memory management and how this is an issue from before the
bug details were released and a follow up article from the same guy about
the bugs.

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/01/whats-behind-the-intel-design-flaw-forcing-numerous-patches/

If I were still teaching sysadmin that article would be required reading.

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/01/meltdown-and-spectre-every-modern-processor-has-unfixable-security-flaws/

ciao,

der.hans



The writeup from the project zero folks: 
https://googleprojectzero.blogspot.com/2018/01/reading-privileged-memory-with-side.html



I would be more concerned IF the next gen CPU has this fixed. All's I know is 
that if Intel wants to fix the very next gen, they will need to scrap a lot of 
silicon that has already been finished.

Sent from [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com), Swiss-based encrypted email.

 Original Message 
On Jan 3, 2018, 15:35, Nathan O'Brennan wrote:


I'm more curious to know which versions of Intel's upcoming chips have been 
fixed already. I would like to upgrade my current workstation in the next year 
and will stick with Intel despite any performance impact over AMD.

On 2018-01-03 00:43, Aaron Jones wrote:



I read the performance hit for Intel chips will be %35 or so after the fix.

On Jan 2, 2018, at 7:49 PM, Eric Oyen <eric.o...@icloud.com> wrote:


so, does this mean that the UEFI might get patched first? OR, does the OS 
ecology have to do so first? Lastly, how much of a performance hit will this 
represent?

-eric
from the central offices of the Technomage Guild, the "oh look! yet another 
bug!" Dept.

On Jan 2, 2018, at 3:39 PM, Matthew Crews wrote:


https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/01/02/intel_cpu_design_flaw/

In a nutshell, it is a major security flaw in Intel hardware dating back a 
decade that is requiring a complete kernel rewrite for every major OS (Linux, 
Windows, Mac, etc) in order to patch out. It cannot be patched out with a CPU 
microcode update. Major enough that code comments are redacted in the patches 
until an embargo period is expired. Also the reported fix will have a huge 
performance impact.

Also crucial to note is that AMD chips are not affected by this.

How the heck does something like this go unnoticed for so long?

Sent from [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com/), Swiss-based encrypted email.


---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss


--
#  https://www.LuftHans.com   https://www.PhxLinux.org
# An architect who does not believe in privacy may also lack faith
# in keeping out the rain" -- John M. Ford, Growing Up Weightless



---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss


---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: Major Intel Memory Vulnerability

[der.hans]

Am 03. Jan, 2018 schwätzte Matthew Crews so:

moin moin,

good writeup on memory management and how this is an issue from before the
bug details were released and a follow up article from the same guy about
the bugs.

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/01/whats-behind-the-intel-design-flaw-forcing-numerous-patches/

If I were still teaching sysadmin that article would be required reading.

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/01/meltdown-and-spectre-every-modern-processor-has-unfixable-security-flaws/

ciao,

der.hans


I would be more concerned IF the next gen CPU has this fixed. All's I know is 
that if Intel wants to fix the very next gen, they will need to scrap a lot of 
silicon that has already been finished.

Sent from [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com), Swiss-based encrypted email.

 Original Message 
On Jan 3, 2018, 15:35, Nathan O'Brennan wrote:


I'm more curious to know which versions of Intel's upcoming chips have been 
fixed already. I would like to upgrade my current workstation in the next year 
and will stick with Intel despite any performance impact over AMD.

On 2018-01-03 00:43, Aaron Jones wrote:



I read the performance hit for Intel chips will be %35 or so after the fix.

On Jan 2, 2018, at 7:49 PM, Eric Oyen <eric.o...@icloud.com> wrote:


so, does this mean that the UEFI might get patched first? OR, does the OS 
ecology have to do so first? Lastly, how much of a performance hit will this 
represent?

-eric
from the central offices of the Technomage Guild, the "oh look! yet another 
bug!" Dept.

On Jan 2, 2018, at 3:39 PM, Matthew Crews wrote:


https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/01/02/intel_cpu_design_flaw/

In a nutshell, it is a major security flaw in Intel hardware dating back a 
decade that is requiring a complete kernel rewrite for every major OS (Linux, 
Windows, Mac, etc) in order to patch out. It cannot be patched out with a CPU 
microcode update. Major enough that code comments are redacted in the patches 
until an embargo period is expired. Also the reported fix will have a huge 
performance impact.

Also crucial to note is that AMD chips are not affected by this.

How the heck does something like this go unnoticed for so long?

Sent from [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com/), Swiss-based encrypted email.


---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss


--
#  https://www.LuftHans.com   https://www.PhxLinux.org
# An architect who does not believe in privacy may also lack faith
# in keeping out the rain" -- John M. Ford, Growing Up Weightless---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: Major Intel Memory Vulnerability

[Nathan O'Brennan]

Came across this Google blog article where they claim AMD is affected as 
well.


https://security.googleblog.com/



On 2018-01-03 16:09, der.hans wrote:

Am 02. Jan, 2018 schwätzte Matthew Crews so:

moin moin,

the bugs now have names and logos, let the marketing begin.

http://www.zdnet.com/article/security-flaws-affect-every-intel-chip-since-1995-arm-processors-vulnerable/

###
Am I affected by the bug?

Most certainly, yes.
###

Rumors thus far:

* new Linux kernel has a 'fix' for some value of 'fix'

* microsoft will force an update tonight

* a macos update from early December already has the fix

* AWS east will be doing reboots tomorrow

* AZURE will have extra reboots in the near future

* Google Android systems ( Nexus and Pixel ) have fixes available, but
might be mostly unaffected anyway

* tshirts available soon ;-)

ciao,

der.hans


https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/01/02/intel_cpu_design_flaw/

In a nutshell, it is a major security flaw in Intel hardware dating 
back a decade that is requiring a complete kernel rewrite for every 
major OS (Linux, Windows, Mac, etc) in order to patch out. It cannot 
be patched out with a CPU microcode update. Major enough that code 
comments are redacted in the patches until an embargo period is 
expired. Also the reported fix will have a huge performance impact.


Also crucial to note is that AMD chips are not affected by this.

How the heck does something like this go unnoticed for so long?

Sent from [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com), Swiss-based encrypted 
email.


---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: Major Intel Memory Vulnerability

[Matthew Crews]

I would be more concerned IF the next gen CPU has this fixed. All's I know is 
that if Intel wants to fix the very next gen, they will need to scrap a lot of 
silicon that has already been finished.

Sent from [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com), Swiss-based encrypted email.

 Original Message 
On Jan 3, 2018, 15:35, Nathan O'Brennan wrote:

> I'm more curious to know which versions of Intel's upcoming chips have been 
> fixed already. I would like to upgrade my current workstation in the next 
> year and will stick with Intel despite any performance impact over AMD.
>
> On 2018-01-03 00:43, Aaron Jones wrote:
>
>>
>> I read the performance hit for Intel chips will be %35 or so after the fix.
>>
>> On Jan 2, 2018, at 7:49 PM, Eric Oyen  wrote:
>>
>>> so, does this mean that the UEFI might get patched first? OR, does the OS 
>>> ecology have to do so first? Lastly, how much of a performance hit will 
>>> this represent?
>>>
>>> -eric
>>> from the central offices of the Technomage Guild, the "oh look! yet another 
>>> bug!" Dept.
>>>
>>> On Jan 2, 2018, at 3:39 PM, Matthew Crews wrote:
>>>
 https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/01/02/intel_cpu_design_flaw/

 In a nutshell, it is a major security flaw in Intel hardware dating back a 
 decade that is requiring a complete kernel rewrite for every major OS 
 (Linux, Windows, Mac, etc) in order to patch out. It cannot be patched out 
 with a CPU microcode update. Major enough that code comments are redacted 
 in the patches until an embargo period is expired. Also the reported fix 
 will have a huge performance impact.

 Also crucial to note is that AMD chips are not affected by this.

 How the heck does something like this go unnoticed for so long?

 Sent from [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com/), Swiss-based encrypted 
 email.
>>
>> ---
>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
>> http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: Major Intel Memory Vulnerability

[der.hans]

Am 02. Jan, 2018 schwätzte Matthew Crews so:

moin moin,

the bugs now have names and logos, let the marketing begin.

http://www.zdnet.com/article/security-flaws-affect-every-intel-chip-since-1995-arm-processors-vulnerable/

###
Am I affected by the bug?

Most certainly, yes.
###

Rumors thus far:

* new Linux kernel has a 'fix' for some value of 'fix'

* microsoft will force an update tonight

* a macos update from early December already has the fix

* AWS east will be doing reboots tomorrow

* AZURE will have extra reboots in the near future

* Google Android systems ( Nexus and Pixel ) have fixes available, but
might be mostly unaffected anyway

* tshirts available soon ;-)

ciao,

der.hans


https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/01/02/intel_cpu_design_flaw/

In a nutshell, it is a major security flaw in Intel hardware dating back a 
decade that is requiring a complete kernel rewrite for every major OS (Linux, 
Windows, Mac, etc) in order to patch out. It cannot be patched out with a CPU 
microcode update. Major enough that code comments are redacted in the patches 
until an embargo period is expired. Also the reported fix will have a huge 
performance impact.

Also crucial to note is that AMD chips are not affected by this.

How the heck does something like this go unnoticed for so long?

Sent from [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com), Swiss-based encrypted email.


--
#  https://www.LuftHans.com   https://www.PhxLinux.org
#  "The illiterate of the 21st century will not be those who cannot read and
#  write, but those who cannot learn, unlearn, and relearn." -- Alvin Toffler---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: Major Intel Memory Vulnerability

[Matthew Crews]

Phoronix posted some synthetic benchmarks with the patch applied. The main 
applications that seem affected are things like database software, while things 
like code compiling and video encoding are barely affected.

https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article=linux-415-x86pti=2

Sent from [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com), Swiss-based encrypted email.

 Original Message 
On Jan 3, 2018, 00:43, Aaron Jones wrote:

> I read the performance hit for Intel chips will be %35 or so after the fix.
>
> On Jan 2, 2018, at 7:49 PM, Eric Oyen  wrote:
>
>> so, does this mean that the UEFI might get patched first? OR, does the OS 
>> ecology have to do so first? Lastly, how much of a performance hit will this 
>> represent?
>>
>> -eric
>> from the central offices of the Technomage Guild, the "oh look! yet another 
>> bug!" Dept.
>>
>> On Jan 2, 2018, at 3:39 PM, Matthew Crews wrote:
>>
>>> https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/01/02/intel_cpu_design_flaw/
>>>
>>> In a nutshell, it is a major security flaw in Intel hardware dating back a 
>>> decade that is requiring a complete kernel rewrite for every major OS 
>>> (Linux, Windows, Mac, etc) in order to patch out. It cannot be patched out 
>>> with a CPU microcode update. Major enough that code comments are redacted 
>>> in the patches until an embargo period is expired. Also the reported fix 
>>> will have a huge performance impact.
>>>
>>> Also crucial to note is that AMD chips are not affected by this.
>>>
>>> How the heck does something like this go unnoticed for so long?
>>>
>>> Sent from [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com/), Swiss-based encrypted 
>>> email.
>>>
>>> ---
>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
>>> http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>
>> ---
>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
>> http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: Major Intel Memory Vulnerability

[Aaron Jones]

I read the performance hit for Intel chips will be %35 or so after the fix. 

> On Jan 2, 2018, at 7:49 PM, Eric Oyen  wrote:
> 
> so, does this mean that the UEFI might get patched first? OR, does the OS 
> ecology have to do so first? Lastly, how much of a performance hit will this 
> represent?
> 
> -eric
> from the central offices of the Technomage Guild, the "oh look! yet another 
> bug!" Dept.
> 
>> On Jan 2, 2018, at 3:39 PM, Matthew Crews wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/01/02/intel_cpu_design_flaw/
>> 
>> In a nutshell, it is a major security flaw in Intel hardware dating back a 
>> decade that is requiring a complete kernel rewrite for every major OS 
>> (Linux, Windows, Mac, etc) in order to patch out. It cannot be patched out 
>> with a CPU microcode update. Major enough that code comments are redacted in 
>> the patches until an embargo period is expired. Also the reported fix will 
>> have a huge performance impact.
>> 
>> Also crucial to note is that AMD chips are not affected by this.
>> 
>> How the heck does something like this go unnoticed for so long?
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Sent from ProtonMail, Swiss-based encrypted email.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ---
>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
>> http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
> 
> ---
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: Major Intel Memory Vulnerability

[Eric Oyen]

so, does this mean that the UEFI might get patched first? OR, does the OS 
ecology have to do so first? Lastly, how much of a performance hit will this 
represent?

-eric
from the central offices of the Technomage Guild, the "oh look! yet another 
bug!" Dept.

On Jan 2, 2018, at 3:39 PM, Matthew Crews wrote:

> 
> https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/01/02/intel_cpu_design_flaw/
> 
> In a nutshell, it is a major security flaw in Intel hardware dating back a 
> decade that is requiring a complete kernel rewrite for every major OS (Linux, 
> Windows, Mac, etc) in order to patch out. It cannot be patched out with a CPU 
> microcode update. Major enough that code comments are redacted in the patches 
> until an embargo period is expired. Also the reported fix will have a huge 
> performance impact.
> 
> Also crucial to note is that AMD chips are not affected by this.
> 
> How the heck does something like this go unnoticed for so long?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from ProtonMail, Swiss-based encrypted email.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ---
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

RE: Major Intel Memory Vulnerability

[Carruth, Rusty]

If you read the article, it went undetected so long probably because it looks 
like you have to do 2 or 3 ‘illegal’ things in just the right order at just the 
right time.  (‘illegal’ as in ‘not supposed to work’.  I did find the second 
article very interesting – the one that explained rowhammer.)

I mean, how long did it take my friends at ASU lo these many years ago to put 
together 3 little bits of information to realize the large hole that was left?  
Oh, probably at least a year…  So even with motivation and time AND all the 
information presented right there in front of you, it can take a while.  THIS 
bug apparently involves doing stuff that isn’t really supposed to work.

(And Rowhammer is just SICK.)


From: PLUG-discuss [mailto:plug-discuss-boun...@lists.phxlinux.org] On Behalf 
Of Matthew Crews
Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2018 3:39 PM
To: Main PLUG discussion list
Subject: Major Intel Memory Vulnerability


https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/01/02/intel_cpu_design_flaw/

In a nutshell, it is a major security flaw in Intel hardware dating back a 
decade that is requiring a complete kernel rewrite for every major OS (Linux, 
Windows, Mac, etc) in order to patch out. It cannot be patched out with a CPU 
microcode update. Major enough that code comments are redacted in the patches 
until an embargo period is expired. Also the reported fix will have a huge 
performance impact.

Also crucial to note is that AMD chips are not affected by this.

How the heck does something like this go unnoticed for so long?




Sent from ProtonMail<https://protonmail.com>, Swiss-based encrypted email.



---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: Major Intel Memory Vulnerability

[techlists]

Interestingly the last line of the article says "A spokesperson for
Intel was not available for comment."

On 2018-01-02 15:39, Matthew Crews wrote:

> https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/01/02/intel_cpu_design_flaw/
> 
> In a nutshell, it is a major security flaw in Intel hardware dating back a 
> decade that is requiring a complete kernel rewrite for every major OS (Linux, 
> Windows, Mac, etc) in order to patch out. It cannot be patched out with a CPU 
> microcode update. Major enough that code comments are redacted in the patches 
> until an embargo period is expired. Also the reported fix will have a huge 
> performance impact.
> 
> Also crucial to note is that AMD chips are not affected by this.
> 
> How the heck does something like this go unnoticed for so long?
> 
> Sent from ProtonMail [1], Swiss-based encrypted email.
> 
> ---
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
 

Links:
--
[1] https://protonmail.com---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: Major Intel Memory Vulnerability

[der.hans]

Am 02. Jan, 2018 schwätzte Matthew Crews so:

moin moin,

thanks! I was just looking to see if there was an update on the story :).

http://pythonsweetness.tumblr.com/post/169166980422/the-mysterious-case-of-the-linux-page-table

ciao,

der.hans


https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/01/02/intel_cpu_design_flaw/

In a nutshell, it is a major security flaw in Intel hardware dating back a 
decade that is requiring a complete kernel rewrite for every major OS (Linux, 
Windows, Mac, etc) in order to patch out. It cannot be patched out with a CPU 
microcode update. Major enough that code comments are redacted in the patches 
until an embargo period is expired. Also the reported fix will have a huge 
performance impact.

Also crucial to note is that AMD chips are not affected by this.

How the heck does something like this go unnoticed for so long?

Sent from [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com), Swiss-based encrypted email.


--
#  https://www.LuftHans.com   https://www.PhxLinux.org
#  "Try not to become a man of success, but rather try to become a man
#  of value" -- Albert Einstein---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Major Intel Memory Vulnerability

[Matthew Crews]

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/01/02/intel_cpu_design_flaw/

In a nutshell, it is a major security flaw in Intel hardware dating back a 
decade that is requiring a complete kernel rewrite for every major OS (Linux, 
Windows, Mac, etc) in order to patch out. It cannot be patched out with a CPU 
microcode update. Major enough that code comments are redacted in the patches 
until an embargo period is expired. Also the reported fix will have a huge 
performance impact.

Also crucial to note is that AMD chips are not affected by this.

How the heck does something like this go unnoticed for so long?

Sent from [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com), Swiss-based encrypted email.---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: memory

[Michael]

okay guys I ordered the new memory and eight GB is on its way.

On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 2:31 PM, Michael <bmi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> figures... of a book of over 50 pages that is the only page I missed.
>
> On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 2:14 PM, Michael <bmi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I'll do it the simple way: take an existing card in and say  max me!
>>
>> :D
>>
>> Anyways the guy I bought it from is a professor at UF. He gave me all the
>> paperwork. Gee, I bet what I need is in the manual.
>>
>> On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 1:47 PM, KevinO <ke...@kevino.org> wrote:
>>
>>> On 03/12/2016 11:16 AM, Michael wrote:
>>> > Thanks, Brian. I bought the computer from a friend for $60 so I wasn't
>>> > expecting much. Actually this thing has run fine until I started laying
>>> > with Hugin!
>>> >
>>> Mike,
>>>
>>> You can go to: http://www.crucial.com/
>>>
>>> and use the "Crucial Advisor tool" to determine what your system can
>>> handle.
>>> You'll need to know the brand and model number of your motherboard or
>>> system.
>>>
>>> HTH
>>>
>>> --
>>> KevinO
>>> ---
>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
>>> http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> :-)~MIKE~(-:
>>
>
>
>
> --
> :-)~MIKE~(-:
>



-- 
:-)~MIKE~(-:
---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: memory

[Michael]

I'll do it the simple way: take an existing card in and say  max me!

:D

Anyways the guy I bought it from is a professor at UF. He gave me all the
paperwork. Gee, I bet what I need is in the manual.

On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 1:47 PM, KevinO  wrote:

> On 03/12/2016 11:16 AM, Michael wrote:
> > Thanks, Brian. I bought the computer from a friend for $60 so I wasn't
> > expecting much. Actually this thing has run fine until I started laying
> > with Hugin!
> >
> Mike,
>
> You can go to: http://www.crucial.com/
>
> and use the "Crucial Advisor tool" to determine what your system can
> handle.
> You'll need to know the brand and model number of your motherboard or
> system.
>
> HTH
>
> --
> KevinO
> ---
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>



-- 
:-)~MIKE~(-:
---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: memory

[KevinO]

On 03/12/2016 11:16 AM, Michael wrote:
> Thanks, Brian. I bought the computer from a friend for $60 so I wasn't
> expecting much. Actually this thing has run fine until I started laying
> with Hugin!
> 
Mike,

You can go to: http://www.crucial.com/

and use the "Crucial Advisor tool" to determine what your system can handle.
You'll need to know the brand and model number of your motherboard or system.

HTH

-- 
KevinO
---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: memory

[Brian Cluff]

Yeah, I have to admit that Hugin is the main reason that my computer has so 
much RAM.

Brian Cluff

On March 12, 2016 11:16:06 AM MST, Michael <bmi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Thanks, Brian. I bought the computer from a friend for $60 so I wasn't
>expecting much. Actually this thing has run fine until I started laying
>with Hugin!
>
>On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 1:13 PM, Brian Cluff <br...@snaptek.com> wrote:
>
>> I'm guessing you are nowhere near maxed out.  It says you have 2
>empty
>> DIMM slots, and the other 2 slots only have 2 gig DIMMs in them, so
>I'm
>> guessing that you can probably put bare minimum of double the memory
>you
>> have now and probably at least 4X times memory you have now if you
>outright
>> replace the DIMMs with 4 gig sticks.
>>
>> Brian Cluff
>>
>>
>> On 03/12/2016 11:04 AM, Michael wrote:
>>
>>> I got some jobs that are making me a little money (finally) so I can
>>> make my computer better. I was stitching some photographs together
>and
>>> before hugin started to do it's thing  it said I didn't have enough
>>> memory to run four threads but enough to run only one. How can I
>tell if
>>> my memory is maxed?
>>>   The attachment is lshw (I think that is what I need to do) and
>this is
>>> what I think is the correct section:
>>>
>>>   *-memory
>>>description: System Memory
>>>physical id: 28
>>>slot: System board or motherboard
>>>size: 4GiB
>>>  *-bank:0
>>>   description: DIMM 800 MHz (1.2 ns)
>>>   product: None
>>>   vendor: None
>>>   physical id: 0
>>>   serial: None
>>>   slot: A0
>>>   size: 2GiB
>>>   width: 64 bits
>>>   clock: 800MHz (1.2ns)
>>>  *-bank:1
>>>   description: DIMM 800 MHz (1.2 ns)
>>>   product: None
>>>   vendor: None
>>>   physical id: 1
>>>   serial: None
>>>   slot: A1
>>>   size: 2GiB
>>>   width: 64 bits
>>>   clock: 800MHz (1.2ns)
>>>  *-bank:2
>>>   description: DIMM 800 MHz (1.2 ns) [empty]
>>>   product: None
>>>   vendor: None
>>>   physical id: 2
>>>   serial: None
>>>   slot: A2
>>>   width: 64 bits
>>>   clock: 800MHz (1.2ns)
>>>  *-bank:3
>>>   description: DIMM 800 MHz (1.2 ns) [empty]
>>>   product: None
>>>   vendor: None
>>>   physical id: 3
>>>   serial: None
>>>   slot: A3
>>>   width: 64 bits
>>>   clock: 800MHz (1.2ns)
>>>   *-pci:0
>>>description: Host bridge
>>>product: RS880 Host Bridge
>>>vendor: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. [AMD]
>>>physical id: 100
>>>bus info: pci@:00:00.0
>>>version: 00
>>>width: 64 bits
>>>clock: 66MHz
>>>configuration: latency=32
>>>  *-pci:0
>>>   description: PCI bridge
>>>   product: RS780 PCI to PCI bridge (ext gfx port 0)
>>>   vendor: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. [AMD]
>>>   physical id: 2
>>>   bus info: pci@:00:02.0
>>>   version: 00
>>>   width: 32 bits
>>>   clock: 33MHz
>>>   capabilities: pci pm pciexpress msi ht normal_decode
>>> bus_master cap_list
>>>   configuration: driver=pcieport
>>>   resources: irq:24 ioport:e000(size=4096)
>>> memory:fdf0-fdff ioport:d000(size=268435456)
>>> *-display
>>>  description: VGA compatible controller
>>>  product: RV770 [Radeon HD 4850]
>>>  vendor: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. [AMD/ATI]
>>>  physical id: 0
>>>  bus info: pci@:01:00.0
>>>  version: 00
>>>  width: 64 bits
>>>  clock: 33MHz
>>>

Re: memory

[Michael]

Thanks, Brian. I bought the computer from a friend for $60 so I wasn't
expecting much. Actually this thing has run fine until I started laying
with Hugin!

On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 1:13 PM, Brian Cluff <br...@snaptek.com> wrote:

> I'm guessing you are nowhere near maxed out.  It says you have 2 empty
> DIMM slots, and the other 2 slots only have 2 gig DIMMs in them, so I'm
> guessing that you can probably put bare minimum of double the memory you
> have now and probably at least 4X times memory you have now if you outright
> replace the DIMMs with 4 gig sticks.
>
> Brian Cluff
>
>
> On 03/12/2016 11:04 AM, Michael wrote:
>
>> I got some jobs that are making me a little money (finally) so I can
>> make my computer better. I was stitching some photographs together and
>> before hugin started to do it's thing  it said I didn't have enough
>> memory to run four threads but enough to run only one. How can I tell if
>> my memory is maxed?
>>   The attachment is lshw (I think that is what I need to do) and this is
>> what I think is the correct section:
>>
>>   *-memory
>>description: System Memory
>>physical id: 28
>>slot: System board or motherboard
>>size: 4GiB
>>  *-bank:0
>>   description: DIMM 800 MHz (1.2 ns)
>>   product: None
>>   vendor: None
>>   physical id: 0
>>   serial: None
>>   slot: A0
>>   size: 2GiB
>>   width: 64 bits
>>   clock: 800MHz (1.2ns)
>>  *-bank:1
>>   description: DIMM 800 MHz (1.2 ns)
>>   product: None
>>   vendor: None
>>   physical id: 1
>>   serial: None
>>   slot: A1
>>   size: 2GiB
>>   width: 64 bits
>>   clock: 800MHz (1.2ns)
>>  *-bank:2
>>   description: DIMM 800 MHz (1.2 ns) [empty]
>>   product: None
>>   vendor: None
>>   physical id: 2
>>   serial: None
>>   slot: A2
>>   width: 64 bits
>>   clock: 800MHz (1.2ns)
>>  *-bank:3
>>   description: DIMM 800 MHz (1.2 ns) [empty]
>>   product: None
>>   vendor: None
>>   physical id: 3
>>   serial: None
>>   slot: A3
>>   width: 64 bits
>>   clock: 800MHz (1.2ns)
>>   *-pci:0
>>description: Host bridge
>>product: RS880 Host Bridge
>>vendor: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. [AMD]
>>physical id: 100
>>bus info: pci@:00:00.0
>>version: 00
>>width: 64 bits
>>clock: 66MHz
>>configuration: latency=32
>>  *-pci:0
>>   description: PCI bridge
>>   product: RS780 PCI to PCI bridge (ext gfx port 0)
>>   vendor: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. [AMD]
>>   physical id: 2
>>   bus info: pci@:00:02.0
>>   version: 00
>>   width: 32 bits
>>   clock: 33MHz
>>   capabilities: pci pm pciexpress msi ht normal_decode
>> bus_master cap_list
>>   configuration: driver=pcieport
>>   resources: irq:24 ioport:e000(size=4096)
>> memory:fdf0-fdff ioport:d000(size=268435456)
>> *-display
>>  description: VGA compatible controller
>>  product: RV770 [Radeon HD 4850]
>>  vendor: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. [AMD/ATI]
>>  physical id: 0
>>  bus info: pci@:01:00.0
>>  version: 00
>>  width: 64 bits
>>  clock: 33MHz
>>  capabilities: pm pciexpress msi vga_controller
>> bus_master cap_list rom
>>  configuration: driver=radeon latency=0
>>  resources: irq:27 memory:d000-dfff
>> memory:fdfe-fdfe ioport:ee00(size=256) memory:fdf0-fdf1
>> *-multimedia
>>  description: Audio device
>>  product: RV770 HDMI Audio [Radeon HD 4850/4870]
>>  vendor: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. [AMD/ATI]
>>  physical id: 0.1
>>  bus info: 

Re: memory

[Brian Cluff]

I'm guessing you are nowhere near maxed out.  It says you have 2 empty 
DIMM slots, and the other 2 slots only have 2 gig DIMMs in them, so I'm 
guessing that you can probably put bare minimum of double the memory you 
have now and probably at least 4X times memory you have now if you 
outright replace the DIMMs with 4 gig sticks.


Brian Cluff

On 03/12/2016 11:04 AM, Michael wrote:

I got some jobs that are making me a little money (finally) so I can
make my computer better. I was stitching some photographs together and
before hugin started to do it's thing  it said I didn't have enough
memory to run four threads but enough to run only one. How can I tell if
my memory is maxed?
  The attachment is lshw (I think that is what I need to do) and this is
what I think is the correct section:

  *-memory
   description: System Memory
   physical id: 28
   slot: System board or motherboard
   size: 4GiB
 *-bank:0
  description: DIMM 800 MHz (1.2 ns)
  product: None
  vendor: None
  physical id: 0
  serial: None
  slot: A0
  size: 2GiB
  width: 64 bits
  clock: 800MHz (1.2ns)
 *-bank:1
  description: DIMM 800 MHz (1.2 ns)
  product: None
  vendor: None
  physical id: 1
  serial: None
  slot: A1
  size: 2GiB
  width: 64 bits
  clock: 800MHz (1.2ns)
 *-bank:2
  description: DIMM 800 MHz (1.2 ns) [empty]
  product: None
  vendor: None
  physical id: 2
  serial: None
  slot: A2
  width: 64 bits
  clock: 800MHz (1.2ns)
 *-bank:3
  description: DIMM 800 MHz (1.2 ns) [empty]
  product: None
  vendor: None
  physical id: 3
  serial: None
  slot: A3
  width: 64 bits
  clock: 800MHz (1.2ns)
  *-pci:0
   description: Host bridge
   product: RS880 Host Bridge
   vendor: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. [AMD]
   physical id: 100
   bus info: pci@:00:00.0
   version: 00
   width: 64 bits
   clock: 66MHz
   configuration: latency=32
 *-pci:0
  description: PCI bridge
  product: RS780 PCI to PCI bridge (ext gfx port 0)
  vendor: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. [AMD]
  physical id: 2
  bus info: pci@:00:02.0
  version: 00
  width: 32 bits
  clock: 33MHz
  capabilities: pci pm pciexpress msi ht normal_decode
bus_master cap_list
  configuration: driver=pcieport
  resources: irq:24 ioport:e000(size=4096)
memory:fdf0-fdff ioport:d000(size=268435456)
*-display
 description: VGA compatible controller
 product: RV770 [Radeon HD 4850]
 vendor: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. [AMD/ATI]
 physical id: 0
 bus info: pci@:01:00.0
 version: 00
 width: 64 bits
 clock: 33MHz
 capabilities: pm pciexpress msi vga_controller
bus_master cap_list rom
 configuration: driver=radeon latency=0
 resources: irq:27 memory:d000-dfff
memory:fdfe-fdfe ioport:ee00(size=256) memory:fdf0-fdf1
*-multimedia
 description: Audio device
 product: RV770 HDMI Audio [Radeon HD 4850/4870]
 vendor: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. [AMD/ATI]
 physical id: 0.1
 bus info: pci@:01:00.1
 version: 00
 width: 64 bits
 clock: 33MHz
 capabilities: pm pciexpress msi bus_master cap_list
 configuration: driver=snd_hda_intel latency=0
 resources: irq:28 memory:fdffc000-fdff
 *-pci:1
  description: PCI bridge
  product: RS780/RS880 PCI to PCI bridge (PCIE port 5)
  vendor: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. [AMD]
  physical id: a
  bus info: pci@:00:0a.0
  version: 00
  width: 32 bits
  clock: 33MHz
  capabilities: pci pm pciexpress msi ht normal_decode
bus_master cap_list
  configuration: driver=pcieport
  resources: irq:25 ioport:d000(size=4096)
memory:fde0-fdef ioport:fdb0(size=1048576)
*-network
 description: Ethernet interface
 product: RTL8111/8168/8411 PCI Express Gigabit Ethernet
Controller
 vendor: Realtek Semiconductor Co., Ltd.
 physical id: 0
 bus

Re: memory usage

[Michael Havens]

I thought that was a good idea!

bmike1@c521 ~ $ sudo crontab -u bmike1 -l
no crontab for bmike1
bmike1@c521 ~ $ sudo crontab -u root -l
no crontab for root
bmike1@c521 ~ $

But not in my case. Unless of course there is another user it is run under.
So the mouse wheel in my mind started to creak. So I inspected the man
for crontab which inspired  me to cat /etc/cron*
which lead me down the path to ls /etc/cron.daily/
and in that directory is a file! /etc/cron.daily/apt/

So How to edit the file? Ask PLUG or ask the web? I opted to ask the web.
It told me: edit crontab with crontab -e
So I tried:
bmike1@c521 /etc/cron.daily $ crontab -e /etc/cron.daily/apt
bmike1@c521 /etc/cron.daily $ crontab /etc/cron.daily/apt -e
bmike1@c521 /etc/cron.daily $ sudo crontab /etc/cron.daily/apt -e
and
bmike1@c521 /etc/cron.daily $ sudo crontab -u bmike1 /etc/cron.daily/apt/ -e
all of which responded with:
crontab: usage error: no arguments permitted after this option
usage: crontab [-u user] file
crontab [ -u user ] [ -i ] { -e | -l | -r }
(default operation is replace, per 1003.2)
-e (edit user's crontab)
-l (list user's crontab)
-r (delete user's crontab)
-i (prompt before deleting user's crontab)
bmike1@c521 /etc/cron.daily $
so I looked a little more in the web and so tried:
sudo *crontab -e* bmike1
which gave the same error.
So now I need to ask what I'm doing wrong.


On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 9:19 PM, Michael Butash <mich...@butash.net> wrote:

> I've noticed on lower-end systems, that daily cron will peg a system for a
> bit while that occurs.  I had an ancient imac with ubuntu installed that
> the apt update would hang the system for like a half-hour with an old
> 400mhz ppc proc, consuming all cpu and memory, then swap and thus disks
> too.  I finally just disabled it, and shortly thereafter retired the
> outdated system itself that it obviously had outlived its usefulness vs.
> power drawn.
>
> You likely have the same issue, just when using it, the update will slam
> the system.  Might be better off doing it manually, or setting the update
> time for the cronjob to overnight when not using it.
>
> -mb
>
>
> On 09/19/2015 09:25 AM, Michael Havens wrote:
>
>> the problem seems to have been checkapt.py . I tried to figure out what
>> it does and it seems that it locks a database (apt's?). But it couldn't of
>> been apt's as I wasn't running apt. Then I ran top again and it seemed to
>> have corrected itself after 10 or fifteen minutes. Am I correct in what I
>> think it does? Is it safe to kill if this happens again?
>>
>
> ---
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>



-- 
:-)~MIKE~(-:
---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: memory usage

[Michael Butash]

I've noticed on lower-end systems, that daily cron will peg a system for 
a bit while that occurs.  I had an ancient imac with ubuntu installed 
that the apt update would hang the system for like a half-hour with an 
old 400mhz ppc proc, consuming all cpu and memory, then swap and thus 
disks too.  I finally just disabled it, and shortly thereafter retired 
the outdated system itself that it obviously had outlived its usefulness 
vs. power drawn.


You likely have the same issue, just when using it, the update will slam 
the system.  Might be better off doing it manually, or setting the 
update time for the cronjob to overnight when not using it.


-mb


On 09/19/2015 09:25 AM, Michael Havens wrote:
the problem seems to have been checkapt.py . I tried to figure out 
what it does and it seems that it locks a database (apt's?). But it 
couldn't of been apt's as I wasn't running apt. Then I ran top again 
and it seemed to have corrected itself after 10 or fifteen minutes. Am 
I correct in what I think it does? Is it safe to kill if this happens 
again?


---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: memory usage

[Keith Smith]

Look at the command "nice" to see if that will help.

On 2015-09-21 18:19, Michael Butash wrote:

I've noticed on lower-end systems, that daily cron will peg a system
for a bit while that occurs.  I had an ancient imac with ubuntu
installed that the apt update would hang the system for like a
half-hour with an old 400mhz ppc proc, consuming all cpu and memory,
then swap and thus disks too.  I finally just disabled it, and shortly
thereafter retired the outdated system itself that it obviously had
outlived its usefulness vs. power drawn.

You likely have the same issue, just when using it, the update will
slam the system.  Might be better off doing it manually, or setting
the update time for the cronjob to overnight when not using it.

-mb


On 09/19/2015 09:25 AM, Michael Havens wrote:
the problem seems to have been checkapt.py . I tried to figure out 
what it does and it seems that it locks a database (apt's?). But it 
couldn't of been apt's as I wasn't running apt. Then I ran top again 
and it seemed to have corrected itself after 10 or fifteen minutes. Am 
I correct in what I think it does? Is it safe to kill if this happens 
again?


---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss


--
Keith Smith
---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: memory usage

[Michael Havens]

Nice will work nicely!
I think I should have apt run at 0400 hours.
 I just relooked at the man page and don't know if it is what I want.
Like I said I want it to run at 4AM. I think nice just makes it take a less
prioritized position.

MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.182.44.129 with HTTP; Sat, 19 Sep 2015 09:25:25 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: 

References: 
<0c928fc7-441f-4e11-916b-a65a4417e...@deviltracks.net>
<830760a8-c3a7-455f-bc14-c436bc5c7...@deviltracks.net>

Date: Sat, 19 Sep 2015 12:25:25 -0400
Delivered-To: bmi...@gmail.com
Message-ID: 

memory usage

[Michael Havens]

what is the bash command that gives you a chart of memory usage? Something
is bogging my system and I don't know what it is. I want to sill it!

-- 
:-)~MIKE~(-:
---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: memory usage

[Ed]

smem

On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 8:46 AM, Fabian Santiago
<fsanti...@deviltracks.net> wrote:
> Sorry, lower case top
>
> --
>
> Fabe
>
>
> On Sep 19, 2015, at 11:45 AM, Fabian Santiago <fsanti...@deviltracks.net>
> wrote:
>
> Top
>
> --
>
> Fabe
>
>
> On Sep 19, 2015, at 11:43 AM, Michael Havens <bmi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> what is the bash command that gives you a chart of memory usage? Something
> is bogging my system and I don't know what it is. I want to sill it!
>
> --
> :-)~MIKE~(-:
>
> ---
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>
> ---
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>
>
> ---
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: memory usage

[Michael Havens]

Thank you so much.

On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 11:46 AM, Fabian Santiago <fsanti...@deviltracks.net
> wrote:

> Sorry, lower case top
>
> --
>
> Fabe
>
>
> On Sep 19, 2015, at 11:45 AM, Fabian Santiago <fsanti...@deviltracks.net>
> wrote:
>
> Top
>
> --
>
> Fabe
>
>
> On Sep 19, 2015, at 11:43 AM, Michael Havens <bmi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> what is the bash command that gives you a chart of memory usage? Something
> is bogging my system and I don't know what it is. I want to sill it!
>
> --
> :-)~MIKE~(-:
>
> ---
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>
> ---
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>
>
> ---
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>



-- 
:-)~MIKE~(-:
---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: memory usage

[Michael Havens]

the problem seems to have been checkapt.py . I tried to figure out what it
does and it seems that it locks a database (apt's?). But it couldn't of
been apt's as I wasn't running apt. Then I ran top again and it seemed to
have corrected itself after 10 or fifteen minutes. Am I correct in what I
think it does? Is it safe to kill if this happens again?

On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 12:13 PM, Ed <p...@0x1b.com> wrote:

> smem
>
> On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 8:46 AM, Fabian Santiago
> <fsanti...@deviltracks.net> wrote:
> > Sorry, lower case top
> >
> > --
> >
> > Fabe
> >
> >
> > On Sep 19, 2015, at 11:45 AM, Fabian Santiago <fsanti...@deviltracks.net
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> > Top
> >
> > --
> >
> > Fabe
> >
> >
> > On Sep 19, 2015, at 11:43 AM, Michael Havens <bmi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > what is the bash command that gives you a chart of memory usage?
> Something
> > is bogging my system and I don't know what it is. I want to sill it!
> >
> > --
> > :-)~MIKE~(-:
> >
> > ---
> > PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
> > To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> > http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
> >
> > ---
> > PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
> > To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> > http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
> >
> >
> > ---
> > PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
> > To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> > http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
> ---
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>



-- 
:-)~MIKE~(-:
---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: memory usage

[Fabian Santiago]

Top

--

Fabe


> On Sep 19, 2015, at 11:43 AM, Michael Havens <bmi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> what is the bash command that gives you a chart of memory usage? Something is 
> bogging my system and I don't know what it is. I want to sill it!
> 
> -- 
> :-)~MIKE~(-:
> ---
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: memory usage

[Brian Cluff]

Most desktops have a number of package related scripts that run in the 
background that will update your package database, and/or install 
updates, etc.  Since they are working with the package database, apt 
will lock the database while it is in use.  Usually you won't notice 
these scripts running at all, but if there are a number of updates that 
are installing your system can work fairly hard while they are being 
installed.
It's best to just leave it to it's work until it's done so you don't 
accidentally leave you system broken and possibly unbootable if it's 
upgrading something like the kernel.


Brian Cluff

On 09/19/2015 09:25 AM, Michael Havens wrote:

the problem seems to have been checkapt.py . I tried to figure out what
it does and it seems that it locks a database (apt's?). But it couldn't
of been apt's as I wasn't running apt. Then I ran top again and it
seemed to have corrected itself after 10 or fifteen minutes. Am I
correct in what I think it does? Is it safe to kill if this happens again?

On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 12:13 PM, Ed <p...@0x1b.com
<mailto:p...@0x1b.com>> wrote:

smem

On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 8:46 AM, Fabian Santiago
<fsanti...@deviltracks.net <mailto:fsanti...@deviltracks.net>> wrote:
 > Sorry, lower case top
 >
 > --
 >
 > Fabe
 >
 >
 > On Sep 19, 2015, at 11:45 AM, Fabian Santiago
<fsanti...@deviltracks.net <mailto:fsanti...@deviltracks.net>>
 > wrote:
 >
 > Top
 >
 > --
 >
 > Fabe
 >
 >
 > On Sep 19, 2015, at 11:43 AM, Michael Havens <bmi...@gmail.com
<mailto:bmi...@gmail.com>> wrote:
 >
 > what is the bash command that gives you a chart of memory usage?
Something
 > is bogging my system and I don't know what it is. I want to sill it!
 >
 > --
 > :-)~MIKE~(-:
 >
 > ---
 > PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
<mailto:PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org>
 > To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
 > http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
 >
 > ---
 > PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
<mailto:PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org>
 > To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
 > http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
 >
 >
 > ---
 > PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
<mailto:PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org>
 > To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
 > http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
<mailto:PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org>
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss




--
:-)~MIKE~(-:


---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss



---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: memory

[Michael Havens]

Well, I got the new memory installed and all. Here are the new stats:

 $ free -h
 total   used   free sharedbuffers cached
Mem:3.8G  1.9G   1.9G14M91M826M
-/+ buffers/cache:   1.0G   2.8G
Swap: 5.6G 0B   5.6G

top - 19:00:37 up  3:18,  2 users,  load average: 0.46, 0.51, 0.49
Tasks: 166 total,   2 running, 164 sleeping,   0 stopped,   0 zombie
%Cpu(s): 16.9 us,  7.6 sy,  2.3 ni, 71.1 id,  2.0 wa,  0.0 hi,  0.0 si,
 0.0 st
KiB Mem:   3982068 total,  2067916 used,  1914152 free,94192 buffers
KiB Swap:  5855656 total,0 used,  5855656 free.   850704 cached Mem

before free:
free -h
   total   used   freesharedbuffers
  cached
Mem:  1.9G   1.4G   489M18M59M   535M

before top:
top - 22:16:50 up 1 day,  8:59,  2 users,  load average: 0.30, 0.19, 0.15
Tasks: 168 total,   2 running, 166 sleeping,   0 stopped,   0 zombie
%Cpu(s): 12.0 us,  2.3 sy,  0.0 ni, 84.1 id,  1.7 wa,  0.0 hi,  0.0 si,
 0.0 st
KiB Mem:   1983332 total,  1812836 used,   170496 free,57184 buffers
KiB Swap:  5855656 total,40496 used,  5815160 free.   560792 cached Mem
:-)~MIKE~(-:
---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: memory

[Brian Cluff]

The important part is, does it feel faster?

Brian Cluff

On October 13, 2014 7:13:48 PM MST, Michael Havens bmi...@gmail.com wrote:
Well, I got the new memory installed and all. Here are the new stats:

 $ free -h
   total   used   free sharedbuffers cached
Mem:3.8G  1.9G   1.9G14M91M826M
-/+ buffers/cache:   1.0G   2.8G
Swap: 5.6G 0B   5.6G

top - 19:00:37 up  3:18,  2 users,  load average: 0.46, 0.51, 0.49
Tasks: 166 total,   2 running, 164 sleeping,   0 stopped,   0 zombie
%Cpu(s): 16.9 us,  7.6 sy,  2.3 ni, 71.1 id,  2.0 wa,  0.0 hi,  0.0 si,
 0.0 st
KiB Mem:   3982068 total,  2067916 used,  1914152 free,94192
buffers
KiB Swap:  5855656 total,0 used,  5855656 free.   850704 cached
Mem

before free:
free -h
   total   used   freesharedbuffers
  cached
Mem:  1.9G   1.4G   489M18M59M  
535M

before top:
top - 22:16:50 up 1 day,  8:59,  2 users,  load average: 0.30, 0.19,
0.15
Tasks: 168 total,   2 running, 166 sleeping,   0 stopped,   0 zombie
%Cpu(s): 12.0 us,  2.3 sy,  0.0 ni, 84.1 id,  1.7 wa,  0.0 hi,  0.0 si,
 0.0 st
KiB Mem:   1983332 total,  1812836 used,   170496 free,57184
buffers
KiB Swap:  5855656 total,40496 used,  5815160 free.   560792 cached
Mem
:-)~MIKE~(-:




---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: memory

[Michael Havens]

I haven't stressed it at all yet the hard drive doesn't run as often

:-)~MIKE~(-:

On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 7:37 PM, Brian Cluff br...@snaptek.com wrote:

 The important part is, does it feel faster?

 Brian Cluff

 On October 13, 2014 7:13:48 PM MST, Michael Havens bmi...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 Well, I got the new memory installed and all. Here are the new stats:

  $ free -h
  total   used   free sharedbuffers cached
 Mem:3.8G  1.9G   1.9G14M91M826M
 -/+ buffers/cache:   1.0G   2.8G
 Swap: 5.6G 0B   5.6G

 top - 19:00:37 up  3:18,  2 users,  load average: 0.46, 0.51, 0.49
 Tasks: 166 total,   2 running, 164 sleeping,   0 stopped,   0 zombie
 %Cpu(s): 16.9 us,  7.6 sy,  2.3 ni, 71.1 id,  2.0 wa,  0.0 hi,  0.0 si,
  0.0 st
 KiB Mem:   3982068 total,  2067916 used,  1914152 free,94192 buffers
 KiB Swap:  5855656 total,0 used,  5855656 free.   850704 cached
 Mem

 before free:
 free -h
total   used   freeshared
  buffers   cached
 Mem:  1.9G   1.4G   489M18M59M   535M

 before top:
 top - 22:16:50 up 1 day,  8:59,  2 users,  load average: 0.30, 0.19, 0.15
 Tasks: 168 total,   2 running, 166 sleeping,   0 stopped,   0 zombie
 %Cpu(s): 12.0 us,  2.3 sy,  0.0 ni, 84.1 id,  1.7 wa,  0.0 hi,  0.0 si,
  0.0 st
 KiB Mem:   1983332 total,  1812836 used,   170496 free,57184 buffers
 KiB Swap:  5855656 total,40496 used,  5815160 free.   560792 cached
 Mem
 :-)~MIKE~(-:

 --

 PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
 To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
 http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss


 ---
 PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
 To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
 http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: memory

[Stephen Partington]

Most hardware will drop to the least common denominator. So you should be
fine.
On Oct 9, 2014 10:37 PM, Michael Havens bmi...@gmail.com wrote:

 sorry about the delay I had to go to work.

 top - 22:16:50 up 1 day,  8:59,  2 users,  load average: 0.30, 0.19, 0.15
 Tasks: 168 total,   2 running, 166 sleeping,   0 stopped,   0 zombie
 %Cpu(s): 12.0 us,  2.3 sy,  0.0 ni, 84.1 id,  1.7 wa,  0.0 hi,  0.0 si,
  0.0 st
 KiB Mem:   1983332 total,  1812836 used,   170496 free,57184 buffers
 KiB Swap:  5855656 total,40496 used,  5815160 free.   560792 cached Mem

 it looks to me like the additional memory will be beneficial.

 Nobody answered my question; if I am sent the 533 Mhz ram instead of the
 800 will the different speed rams play together? The reason I ask is Amazon
 sent me a letter saying my order (the 533 Mhz) had shipped then I tried to
 change my order and the company said that it wouldn't be a problem.
 Further, they didn't charge me more so I am thinking they are BSing me. But
 if they did that I would write a negative customer feedback report. SO I
 guess they really are sending me the right memory for the price I paid for
 the slower memory. This company is Computer Memory Solutions
 http://www.amazon.com/gp/node/index.html?ie=UTF8marketplaceID=ATVPDKIKX0DERme=A1X44CXPYKK87Emerchant=A1X44CXPYKK87Eredirect=true
 .

 :-)~MIKE~(-:

 On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 7:49 PM, Mark Phillips m...@phillipsmarketing.biz
 wrote:

 I have found the best number to watch is the amount of swap used. If that
 grows, then you need more RAM. If you are running slow and not using swap,
 then adding RAM won't help.

 Mark

 On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 4:53 PM, Carruth, Rusty ru...@smartm.com wrote:

 Unless his problem is LACK of ram.  Yes, I know it said 489M free.
 Without a look at top I'm not convinced yet that he won't see any
 improvement.



 Here is 'top' from a machine which is pretty un-loaded:



 top - 16:40:14 up 63 days,  1:12,  3 users,  load average: 0.42, 0.62,
 0.67

 Tasks: 287 total,   1 running, 282 sleeping,   0 stopped,   4 zombie

 Cpu(s):  3.8%us,  0.9%sy,  0.0%ni, 95.3%id,  0.0%wa,  0.0%hi,  0.0%si,
 0.0%st

 Mem:   2564652k total,  2053712k used,   510940k free,91448k buffers

 Swap:  6095864k total,   371340k used,  5724524k free,   516624k cached



 And here's a top from one of our servers:



 top - 16:42:03 up 141 days, 19:59,  6 users,  load average: 0.00, 0.02,
 0.05

 Tasks: 274 total,   1 running, 273 sleeping,   0 stopped,   0 zombie

 %Cpu(s):  3.1 us,  0.6 sy,  0.0 ni, 96.0 id,  0.3 wa,  0.0 hi,  0.0 si,
 0.0 st

 KiB Mem:  32898652 total, 32469852 used,   428800 free,  2711252 buffers

 KiB Swap: 33506300 total, 1224 used, 33505076 free, 22613684 cached



 (yeah, 32G of ram.  I can edit (using emacs) a 20G file with NO
 problems.  I know because I have)



 Again, nice and responsive (but then this machine says:



 /var/log/dmesg:[0.07] Calibrating delay loop (skipped), value
 calculated using timer frequency.. 4399.98 BogoMIPS (lpj=8799976)

 /var/log/dmesg:[0.121190] smpboot: Total of 4 processors activated
 (17599.95 BogoMIPS)



 So I suppose that's a pretty hot machine.)



 On the OTHER hand, look at this machine, which runs pretty much as well
 as everything ELSE here I've mentioned:



 top - 16:45:51 up 51 days, 23:59, 28 users,  load average: 4.79, 4.46,
 4.51

 Tasks: 335 total,   1 running, 330 sleeping,   0 stopped,   4 zombie

 %Cpu(s): 70.4 us,  0.8 sy,  0.0 ni, 28.6 id,  0.0 wa,  0.0 hi,  0.1 si,
 0.0 st

 KiB Mem:   8159892 total,  7781364 used,   378528 free,   290460 buffers

 KiB Swap:  2086908 total,0 used,  2086908 free,  5508492 cached



 /var/log/dmesg:[0.01] Calibrating delay loop (skipped), value
 calculated using timer frequency.. 5985.88 BogoMIPS (lpj=11971768)

 /var/log/dmesg:[0.074024] smpboot: Total of 2 processors activated
 (11971.76 BogoMIPS)



 Again, fast cpu, but then I've got 4 processor-bound applications
 running all the time on it so its at a load average of 4.79.  I've
 remembered that the important numbers come from:



 %Cpu(s): 70.4 us,  0.8 sy,  0.0 ni, 28.6 id,  0.0 wa,  0.0 hi,  0.1 si,
 0.0 st



 If that said:



 %Cpu(s): 70.4 us,  0.8 sy,  0.0 ni, 0.6 id,  26.0 wa,  0.0 hi,  0.1 si,
 0.0 st



 You'd have something of a slow machine.  If it said:



 %Cpu(s): 20.4 us,  0.8 sy,  0.0 ni, 8.6 id,  70.0 wa,  0.0 hi,  0.1 si,
 0.0 st



 Youd be going to lunch while waiting for it to finish whatever you were
 doing, if I remember the numbers right.



 IMHO, YMMV, etc, etc J



 I look forward to hearing what Mike discovers.



 *From:* plug-discuss-boun...@lists.phxlinux.org [mailto:
 plug-discuss-boun...@lists.phxlinux.org] *On Behalf Of *Mark Phillips
 *Sent:* Thursday, October 09, 2014 4:36 PM
 *To:* Main PLUG discussion list
 *Subject:* Re: memory



 Mike,

 On page 91 of the Dell Dimension C521 that I sent to you, you can use
 memory sticks at 533 MHz, 667 MHz, and 800 MHz. Since

Re: memory

[Michael Havens]

thanks for confirming my thoughts in the matter.

:-)~MIKE~(-:

On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 5:55 AM, Stephen Partington cryptwo...@gmail.com
wrote:

 Most hardware will drop to the least common denominator. So you should be
 fine.
 On Oct 9, 2014 10:37 PM, Michael Havens bmi...@gmail.com wrote:

 sorry about the delay I had to go to work.

 top - 22:16:50 up 1 day,  8:59,  2 users,  load average: 0.30, 0.19, 0.15
 Tasks: 168 total,   2 running, 166 sleeping,   0 stopped,   0 zombie
 %Cpu(s): 12.0 us,  2.3 sy,  0.0 ni, 84.1 id,  1.7 wa,  0.0 hi,  0.0 si,
  0.0 st
 KiB Mem:   1983332 total,  1812836 used,   170496 free,57184 buffers
 KiB Swap:  5855656 total,40496 used,  5815160 free.   560792 cached
 Mem

 it looks to me like the additional memory will be beneficial.

 Nobody answered my question; if I am sent the 533 Mhz ram instead of the
 800 will the different speed rams play together? The reason I ask is Amazon
 sent me a letter saying my order (the 533 Mhz) had shipped then I tried to
 change my order and the company said that it wouldn't be a problem.
 Further, they didn't charge me more so I am thinking they are BSing me. But
 if they did that I would write a negative customer feedback report. SO I
 guess they really are sending me the right memory for the price I paid for
 the slower memory. This company is Computer Memory Solutions
 http://www.amazon.com/gp/node/index.html?ie=UTF8marketplaceID=ATVPDKIKX0DERme=A1X44CXPYKK87Emerchant=A1X44CXPYKK87Eredirect=true
 .

 :-)~MIKE~(-:

 On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 7:49 PM, Mark Phillips m...@phillipsmarketing.biz
  wrote:

 I have found the best number to watch is the amount of swap used. If
 that grows, then you need more RAM. If you are running slow and not using
 swap, then adding RAM won't help.

 Mark

 On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 4:53 PM, Carruth, Rusty ru...@smartm.com wrote:

 Unless his problem is LACK of ram.  Yes, I know it said 489M free.
 Without a look at top I’m not convinced yet that he won’t see any
 improvement.



 Here is ‘top’ from a machine which is pretty un-loaded:



 top - 16:40:14 up 63 days,  1:12,  3 users,  load average: 0.42, 0.62,
 0.67

 Tasks: 287 total,   1 running, 282 sleeping,   0 stopped,   4 zombie

 Cpu(s):  3.8%us,  0.9%sy,  0.0%ni, 95.3%id,  0.0%wa,  0.0%hi,  0.0%si,
 0.0%st

 Mem:   2564652k total,  2053712k used,   510940k free,91448k buffers

 Swap:  6095864k total,   371340k used,  5724524k free,   516624k cached



 And here’s a top from one of our servers:



 top - 16:42:03 up 141 days, 19:59,  6 users,  load average: 0.00, 0.02,
 0.05

 Tasks: 274 total,   1 running, 273 sleeping,   0 stopped,   0 zombie

 %Cpu(s):  3.1 us,  0.6 sy,  0.0 ni, 96.0 id,  0.3 wa,  0.0 hi,  0.0
 si,  0.0 st

 KiB Mem:  32898652 total, 32469852 used,   428800 free,  2711252 buffers

 KiB Swap: 33506300 total, 1224 used, 33505076 free, 22613684 cached



 (yeah, 32G of ram.  I can edit (using emacs) a 20G file with NO
 problems.  I know because I have)



 Again, nice and responsive (but then this machine says:



 /var/log/dmesg:[0.07] Calibrating delay loop (skipped), value
 calculated using timer frequency.. 4399.98 BogoMIPS (lpj=8799976)

 /var/log/dmesg:[0.121190] smpboot: Total of 4 processors activated
 (17599.95 BogoMIPS)



 So I suppose that’s a pretty hot machine.)



 On the OTHER hand, look at this machine, which runs pretty much as well
 as everything ELSE here I’ve mentioned:



 top - 16:45:51 up 51 days, 23:59, 28 users,  load average: 4.79, 4.46,
 4.51

 Tasks: 335 total,   1 running, 330 sleeping,   0 stopped,   4 zombie

 %Cpu(s): 70.4 us,  0.8 sy,  0.0 ni, 28.6 id,  0.0 wa,  0.0 hi,  0.1
 si,  0.0 st

 KiB Mem:   8159892 total,  7781364 used,   378528 free,   290460 buffers

 KiB Swap:  2086908 total,0 used,  2086908 free,  5508492 cached



 /var/log/dmesg:[0.01] Calibrating delay loop (skipped), value
 calculated using timer frequency.. 5985.88 BogoMIPS (lpj=11971768)

 /var/log/dmesg:[0.074024] smpboot: Total of 2 processors activated
 (11971.76 BogoMIPS)



 Again, fast cpu, but then I’ve got 4 processor-bound applications
 running all the time on it so its at a load average of 4.79.  I’ve
 remembered that the important numbers come from:



 %Cpu(s): 70.4 us,  0.8 sy,  0.0 ni, 28.6 id,  0.0 wa,  0.0 hi,  0.1
 si,  0.0 st



 If that said:



 %Cpu(s): 70.4 us,  0.8 sy,  0.0 ni, 0.6 id,  26.0 wa,  0.0 hi,  0.1
 si,  0.0 st



 You’d have something of a slow machine.  If it said:



 %Cpu(s): 20.4 us,  0.8 sy,  0.0 ni, 8.6 id,  70.0 wa,  0.0 hi,  0.1
 si,  0.0 st



 Youd be going to lunch while waiting for it to finish whatever you were
 doing, if I remember the numbers right.



 IMHO, YMMV, etc, etc J



 I look forward to hearing what Mike discovers.



 *From:* plug-discuss-boun...@lists.phxlinux.org [mailto:
 plug-discuss-boun...@lists.phxlinux.org] *On Behalf Of *Mark Phillips
 *Sent:* Thursday, October 09, 2014 4:36 PM
 *To:* Main PLUG discussion list

Re: memory

[Michael Havens]

On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 10:14 AM, techli...@phpcoderusa.com wrote:


 My question is what is the computer used for?  Are you using it for your
 Linux from scratch project?


Well what happened is I was using my laptop as my main computer (which
I have since learned is BAD); I was running everything through it. Then the
card reader didn't work. No problem, I rarely use that feature anyways and
I got a USB Multicard Reader/Writer. Then certain keys started not working
(and things were progressively getting worse). No problem, I got a USB
keyboard/mouse. Then when I was at the airport to go to FL I found the
internet switch didn't work. Time to take it to a repair shop. Well, I can
still use it for finances until I get it to a shop when I return from
Surfside. Then the fan wasn't working. Then I got back from FL and took the
computer to a repair shop SO I then took my Linux from Scratch computer
and turned it into my central computer. This means I'll have to get another
computer for Linux from Scratch and start all over with LFS. I told the
lady at the repair shop about the fan, the dropping keys, and the internet
switch (forgot about the reader). She got back to me yesterday and said
that the fan was working just fine and that the keyboard needed to be
replaced. I inquired about the internet switch and she said it was a part
of the keyboard. I'm now thinking that the card reader is a part of the
keyboard too but I don't know.
---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: memory

[techlists]

How old is the laptop and what brand?


On 2014-10-10 11:35, Michael Havens wrote:

On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 10:14 AM, techli...@phpcoderusa.com wrote:


My question is what is the computer used for?  Are you using it
for your Linux from scratch project?


Well what happened is I was using my laptop as my main computer
(which I have since learned is BAD); I was running everything through
it. Then the card reader didn't work. No problem, I rarely use that
feature anyways and I got a USB Multicard Reader/Writer. Then certain
keys started not working (and things were progressively getting
worse). No problem, I got a USB keyboard/mouse. Then when I was at
the airport to go to FL I found the internet switch didn't work. Time
to take it to a repair shop. Well, I can still use it for finances
until I get it to a shop when I return from Surfside. Then the fan
wasn't working. Then I got back from FL and took the computer to a
repair shop SO I then took my Linux from Scratch computer and
turned it into my central computer. This means I'll have to get
another computer for Linux from Scratch and start all over with LFS. I
told the lady at the repair shop about the fan, the dropping keys, and
the internet switch (forgot about the reader). She got back to me
yesterday and said that the fan was working just fine and that the
keyboard needed to be replaced. I inquired about the internet switch
and she said it was a part of the keyboard. I'm now thinking that the
card reader is a part of the keyboard too but I don't know.
---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: memory

[Michael Havens]

it is a 3 year old compaq. not that old!

:-)~MIKE~(-:

On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 9:39 AM, techli...@phpcoderusa.com wrote:

 How old is the laptop and what brand?



 On 2014-10-10 11:35, Michael Havens wrote:

 On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 10:14 AM, techli...@phpcoderusa.com wrote:

  My question is what is the computer used for?  Are you using it
 for your Linux from scratch project?


 Well what happened is I was using my laptop as my main computer
 (which I have since learned is BAD); I was running everything through
 it. Then the card reader didn't work. No problem, I rarely use that
 feature anyways and I got a USB Multicard Reader/Writer. Then certain
 keys started not working (and things were progressively getting
 worse). No problem, I got a USB keyboard/mouse. Then when I was at
 the airport to go to FL I found the internet switch didn't work. Time
 to take it to a repair shop. Well, I can still use it for finances
 until I get it to a shop when I return from Surfside. Then the fan
 wasn't working. Then I got back from FL and took the computer to a
 repair shop SO I then took my Linux from Scratch computer and
 turned it into my central computer. This means I'll have to get
 another computer for Linux from Scratch and start all over with LFS. I
 told the lady at the repair shop about the fan, the dropping keys, and
 the internet switch (forgot about the reader). She got back to me
 yesterday and said that the fan was working just fine and that the
 keyboard needed to be replaced. I inquired about the internet switch
 and she said it was a part of the keyboard. I'm now thinking that the
 card reader is a part of the keyboard too but I don't know.
 ---
 PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
 To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
 http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

 ---
 PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
 To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
 http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: memory

[Brian Cluff]

I always figure that a laptop is good for about 2 years.  Anything you 
get beyond that are bonus years, but I certainly wouldn't put much 
money/effort into repairing a laptop after the 2 year mark.


That being said, I usually get more than 2 years out of my laptops, but 
I baby them, so they have really easy lives, but I still wouldn't put 
much into any of them except the one that is under 2 years old.


Brian

On 10/10/2014 09:42 AM, Michael Havens wrote:

it is a 3 year old compaq. not that old!

:-)~MIKE~(-:

On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 9:39 AM, techli...@phpcoderusa.com
mailto:techli...@phpcoderusa.com wrote:

How old is the laptop and what brand?



On 2014-10-10 11:35, Michael Havens wrote:

On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 10:14 AM, techli...@phpcoderusa.com
mailto:techli...@phpcoderusa.com wrote:

My question is what is the computer used for?  Are you using it
for your Linux from scratch project?


Well what happened is I was using my laptop as my main computer
(which I have since learned is BAD); I was running everything
through
it. Then the card reader didn't work. No problem, I rarely use that
feature anyways and I got a USB Multicard Reader/Writer. Then
certain
keys started not working (and things were progressively getting
worse). No problem, I got a USB keyboard/mouse. Then when I was at
the airport to go to FL I found the internet switch didn't work.
Time
to take it to a repair shop. Well, I can still use it for finances
until I get it to a shop when I return from Surfside. Then the fan
wasn't working. Then I got back from FL and took the computer to a
repair shop SO I then took my Linux from Scratch computer and
turned it into my central computer. This means I'll have to get
another computer for Linux from Scratch and start all over with
LFS. I
told the lady at the repair shop about the fan, the dropping
keys, and
the internet switch (forgot about the reader). She got back to me
yesterday and said that the fan was working just fine and that the
keyboard needed to be replaced. I inquired about the internet switch
and she said it was a part of the keyboard. I'm now thinking
that the
card reader is a part of the keyboard too but I don't know.
--__-
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.__org
mailto:PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/__mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

--__-
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.__org
mailto:PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/__mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss




---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss



---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: memory

[techlists]

My mileage has been much better






On 2014-10-10 12:23, Brian Cluff wrote:

I always figure that a laptop is good for about 2 years.  Anything you
get beyond that are bonus years, but I certainly wouldn't put much
money/effort into repairing a laptop after the 2 year mark.

That being said, I usually get more than 2 years out of my laptops,
but I baby them, so they have really easy lives, but I still wouldn't
put much into any of them except the one that is under 2 years old.

Brian

On 10/10/2014 09:42 AM, Michael Havens wrote:

it is a 3 year old compaq. not that old!

:-)~MIKE~(-:

On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 9:39 AM, techli...@phpcoderusa.com
mailto:techli...@phpcoderusa.com wrote:

How old is the laptop and what brand?



On 2014-10-10 11:35, Michael Havens wrote:

On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 10:14 AM, techli...@phpcoderusa.com
mailto:techli...@phpcoderusa.com wrote:

My question is what is the computer used for?  Are you 
using it

for your Linux from scratch project?


Well what happened is I was using my laptop as my main 
computer

(which I have since learned is BAD); I was running everything
through
it. Then the card reader didn't work. No problem, I rarely use 
that

feature anyways and I got a USB Multicard Reader/Writer. Then
certain
keys started not working (and things were progressively 
getting
worse). No problem, I got a USB keyboard/mouse. Then when I 
was at
the airport to go to FL I found the internet switch didn't 
work.

Time
to take it to a repair shop. Well, I can still use it for 
finances
until I get it to a shop when I return from Surfside. Then the 
fan
wasn't working. Then I got back from FL and took the computer 
to a
repair shop SO I then took my Linux from Scratch computer 
and
turned it into my central computer. This means I'll have to 
get
another computer for Linux from Scratch and start all over 
with

LFS. I
told the lady at the repair shop about the fan, the dropping
keys, and
the internet switch (forgot about the reader). She got back to 
me
yesterday and said that the fan was working just fine and that 
the
keyboard needed to be replaced. I inquired about the internet 
switch

and she said it was a part of the keyboard. I'm now thinking
that the
card reader is a part of the keyboard too but I don't know.
--__-
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.__org
mailto:PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/__mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

--__-
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.__org
mailto:PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/__mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss




---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss



---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: memory

[Michael Havens]

On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 4:36 PM, Mark Phillips m...@phillipsmarketing.biz
wrote:

 Mike,

 On page 91 of the Dell Dimension C521 that I sent to you...


I didn't even notice that you sent me the manual. Thanks! That will be
beneficial. Also, after perusing it a little I noticed that they said that
the memories need to be identical in pairs. To me that is saying that the
two 800 Mhz banks would work at 800 Mhz and (if I am sent 533 Mhz chips)the
two 533 Mhz chips would work together.  Here is what it says:

DDR2 Memory Overview
Your computer has a minimum memory configuration of one DDR2 memory module.
This memory module must be installed in DIMM1. If two or more DDR2 memory
modules are installed, they should be installed in pairs of matched memory
size, speed, and technology. If the DDR2 memory modules are not installed
in matched pairs, the computer will continue to operate, but with a slight
reduction in performance. See the label on the module to determine the
module’s capacity.
---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: memory

[Michael Havens]

On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 10:23 AM, Brian Cluff br...@snaptek.com wrote:

 I always figure that a laptop is good for about 2 years.  Anything you get
 beyond that are bonus years, but I certainly wouldn't put much money/effort
 into repairing a laptop after the 2 year mark.


Why not? Is it only because the technology would have progressed?
---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Re: memory

[Michael Havens]

if I were to get a new laptop would I have problems putting Linux on it?

:-)~MIKE~(-:

On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 11:12 AM, Brian Cluff br...@snaptek.com wrote:

 Don't get me wrong.  I've only had a couple of laptops die ever.  I just
 don't invest anything extra in them after a couple of years.  It just makes
 more sense to save your money and get another better one than it does to
 pour a bunch on money into a laptop that is well past it's prime.

 Brian


 On 10/10/2014 10:38 AM, techli...@phpcoderusa.com wrote:



 My mileage has been much better






 On 2014-10-10 12:23, Brian Cluff wrote:

 I always figure that a laptop is good for about 2 years.  Anything you
 get beyond that are bonus years, but I certainly wouldn't put much
 money/effort into repairing a laptop after the 2 year mark.

 That being said, I usually get more than 2 years out of my laptops,
 but I baby them, so they have really easy lives, but I still wouldn't
 put much into any of them except the one that is under 2 years old.

 Brian

 On 10/10/2014 09:42 AM, Michael Havens wrote:

 it is a 3 year old compaq. not that old!

 :-)~MIKE~(-:

 On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 9:39 AM, techli...@phpcoderusa.com
 mailto:techli...@phpcoderusa.com wrote:

 How old is the laptop and what brand?



 On 2014-10-10 11:35, Michael Havens wrote:

 On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 10:14 AM, techli...@phpcoderusa.com
 mailto:techli...@phpcoderusa.com wrote:

 My question is what is the computer used for?  Are you
 using it
 for your Linux from scratch project?


 Well what happened is I was using my laptop as my main
 computer
 (which I have since learned is BAD); I was running everything
 through
 it. Then the card reader didn't work. No problem, I rarely
 use that
 feature anyways and I got a USB Multicard Reader/Writer. Then
 certain
 keys started not working (and things were progressively getting
 worse). No problem, I got a USB keyboard/mouse. Then when I
 was at
 the airport to go to FL I found the internet switch didn't work.
 Time
 to take it to a repair shop. Well, I can still use it for
 finances
 until I get it to a shop when I return from Surfside. Then
 the fan
 wasn't working. Then I got back from FL and took the computer
 to a
 repair shop SO I then took my Linux from Scratch computer
 and
 turned it into my central computer. This means I'll have to get
 another computer for Linux from Scratch and start all over with
 LFS. I
 told the lady at the repair shop about the fan, the dropping
 keys, and
 the internet switch (forgot about the reader). She got back
 to me
 yesterday and said that the fan was working just fine and
 that the
 keyboard needed to be replaced. I inquired about the internet
 switch
 and she said it was a part of the keyboard. I'm now thinking
 that the
 card reader is a part of the keyboard too but I don't know.
 --__-
 PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.__org
 mailto:PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
 To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
 http://lists.phxlinux.org/__mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
 http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

 --__-
 PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.__org
 mailto:PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
 To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
 http://lists.phxlinux.org/__mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
 http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss




 ---
 PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
 To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
 http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss


 ---
 PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
 To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
 http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

 ---
 PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
 To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
 http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

  ---
 PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
 To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
 http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

---
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:

Re: memory

[Stephen Partington]

not that i have experienced so far.

On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 11:45 AM, Michael Havens bmi...@gmail.com wrote:

 if I were to get a new laptop would I have problems putting Linux on it?

 :-)~MIKE~(-:

 On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 11:12 AM, Brian Cluff br...@snaptek.com wrote:

 Don't get me wrong.  I've only had a couple of laptops die ever.  I just
 don't invest anything extra in them after a couple of years.  It just makes
 more sense to save your money and get another better one than it does to
 pour a bunch on money into a laptop that is well past it's prime.

 Brian


 On 10/10/2014 10:38 AM, techli...@phpcoderusa.com wrote:



 My mileage has been much better






 On 2014-10-10 12:23, Brian Cluff wrote:

 I always figure that a laptop is good for about 2 years.  Anything you
 get beyond that are bonus years, but I certainly wouldn't put much
 money/effort into repairing a laptop after the 2 year mark.

 That being said, I usually get more than 2 years out of my laptops,
 but I baby them, so they have really easy lives, but I still wouldn't
 put much into any of them except the one that is under 2 years old.

 Brian

 On 10/10/2014 09:42 AM, Michael Havens wrote:

 it is a 3 year old compaq. not that old!

 :-)~MIKE~(-:

 On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 9:39 AM, techli...@phpcoderusa.com
 mailto:techli...@phpcoderusa.com wrote:

 How old is the laptop and what brand?



 On 2014-10-10 11:35, Michael Havens wrote:

 On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 10:14 AM, techli...@phpcoderusa.com
 mailto:techli...@phpcoderusa.com wrote:

 My question is what is the computer used for?  Are you
 using it
 for your Linux from scratch project?


 Well what happened is I was using my laptop as my main
 computer
 (which I have since learned is BAD); I was running everything
 through
 it. Then the card reader didn't work. No problem, I rarely
 use that
 feature anyways and I got a USB Multicard Reader/Writer. Then
 certain
 keys started not working (and things were progressively getting
 worse). No problem, I got a USB keyboard/mouse. Then when I
 was at
 the airport to go to FL I found the internet switch didn't
 work.
 Time
 to take it to a repair shop. Well, I can still use it for
 finances
 until I get it to a shop when I return from Surfside. Then
 the fan
 wasn't working. Then I got back from FL and took the computer
 to a
 repair shop SO I then took my Linux from Scratch computer
 and
 turned it into my central computer. This means I'll have to get
 another computer for Linux from Scratch and start all over with
 LFS. I
 told the lady at the repair shop about the fan, the dropping
 keys, and
 the internet switch (forgot about the reader). She got back
 to me
 yesterday and said that the fan was working just fine and
 that the
 keyboard needed to be replaced. I inquired about the internet
 switch
 and she said it was a part of the keyboard. I'm now thinking
 that the
 card reader is a part of the keyboard too but I don't know.
 --__-
 PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.__org
 mailto:PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
 To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
 http://lists.phxlinux.org/__mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
 http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

 --__-
 PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.__org
 mailto:PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
 To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
 http://lists.phxlinux.org/__mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
 http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss




 ---
 PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
 To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
 http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss


 ---
 PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
 To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
 http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

 ---
 PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
 To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
 http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

  ---
 PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
 To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
 http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss



 ---
 PLUG-discuss mailing list - 

Re: memory

[Michael Havens]

I'm happy with the laptop so I'm just going to get it fixed and save myself
around $100 .

:-)~MIKE~(-:

On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 1:32 PM, Mark Phillips m...@phillipsmarketing.biz
wrote:

 It is a little more challenging installing Linux with the Windows 8 secure
 boot, but there are lots of articles on the Internet to help get over this
 annoyance. You could also buy a laptop from the Linux laptop vendors -
 System 76 is one that comes to mind, and there are several more.

 I have used a lot of Dell laptops and towers with Linux - just be sure to
 check the hardware first. I am using my first System 76 laptop now, and I
 am very pleased with it.

 Mark

 On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 11:46 AM, Stephen Partington cryptwo...@gmail.com
  wrote:

 not that i have experienced so far.

 On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 11:45 AM, Michael Havens bmi...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 if I were to get a new laptop would I have problems putting Linux on it?

 :-)~MIKE~(-:

 On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 11:12 AM, Brian Cluff br...@snaptek.com wrote:

 Don't get me wrong.  I've only had a couple of laptops die ever.  I
 just don't invest anything extra in them after a couple of years.  It just
 makes more sense to save your money and get another better one than it does
 to pour a bunch on money into a laptop that is well past it's prime.

 Brian


 On 10/10/2014 10:38 AM, techli...@phpcoderusa.com wrote:



 My mileage has been much better






 On 2014-10-10 12:23, Brian Cluff wrote:

 I always figure that a laptop is good for about 2 years.  Anything you
 get beyond that are bonus years, but I certainly wouldn't put much
 money/effort into repairing a laptop after the 2 year mark.

 That being said, I usually get more than 2 years out of my laptops,
 but I baby them, so they have really easy lives, but I still wouldn't
 put much into any of them except the one that is under 2 years old.

 Brian

 On 10/10/2014 09:42 AM, Michael Havens wrote:

 it is a 3 year old compaq. not that old!

 :-)~MIKE~(-:

 On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 9:39 AM, techli...@phpcoderusa.com
 mailto:techli...@phpcoderusa.com wrote:

 How old is the laptop and what brand?



 On 2014-10-10 11:35, Michael Havens wrote:

 On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 10:14 AM, techli...@phpcoderusa.com
 mailto:techli...@phpcoderusa.com wrote:

 My question is what is the computer used for?  Are you
 using it
 for your Linux from scratch project?


 Well what happened is I was using my laptop as my main
 computer
 (which I have since learned is BAD); I was running everything
 through
 it. Then the card reader didn't work. No problem, I rarely
 use that
 feature anyways and I got a USB Multicard Reader/Writer. Then
 certain
 keys started not working (and things were progressively
 getting
 worse). No problem, I got a USB keyboard/mouse. Then when I
 was at
 the airport to go to FL I found the internet switch didn't
 work.
 Time
 to take it to a repair shop. Well, I can still use it for
 finances
 until I get it to a shop when I return from Surfside. Then
 the fan
 wasn't working. Then I got back from FL and took the computer
 to a
 repair shop SO I then took my Linux from Scratch computer
 and
 turned it into my central computer. This means I'll have to
 get
 another computer for Linux from Scratch and start all over
 with
 LFS. I
 told the lady at the repair shop about the fan, the dropping
 keys, and
 the internet switch (forgot about the reader). She got back
 to me
 yesterday and said that the fan was working just fine and
 that the
 keyboard needed to be replaced. I inquired about the internet
 switch
 and she said it was a part of the keyboard. I'm now thinking
 that the
 card reader is a part of the keyboard too but I don't know.
 --__-
 PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.__
 org
 mailto:PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
 To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
 http://lists.phxlinux.org/__mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
 http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

 --__-
 PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.__org
 mailto:PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
 To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
 http://lists.phxlinux.org/__mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
 http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss




 ---
 PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
 To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
 http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss


 ---
 

Re: memory

[Brian Cluff]

Probably not, but it would be worth doing a little research to see if 
there is anything that doesn't work out of the box.


The most I haven't been able to get to work out of the box so far has 
been some of the specialized hot keys, but I don't use them anyway, and 
I was able to tweak a config to make them work and then on more recent 
versions they have worked out of the box.


Brian

Brian

On 10/10/2014 11:45 AM, Michael Havens wrote:

if I were to get a new laptop would I have problems putting Linux on it?

:-)~MIKE~(-:

On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 11:12 AM, Brian Cluff br...@snaptek.com
mailto:br...@snaptek.com wrote:

Don't get me wrong.  I've only had a couple of laptops die ever.  I
just don't invest anything extra in them after a couple of years.
It just makes more sense to save your money and get another better
one than it does to pour a bunch on money into a laptop that is well
past it's prime.

Brian


On 10/10/2014 10:38 AM, techli...@phpcoderusa.com
mailto:techli...@phpcoderusa.com wrote:



My mileage has been much better






On 2014-10-10 12:23, Brian Cluff wrote:

I always figure that a laptop is good for about 2 years.
Anything you
get beyond that are bonus years, but I certainly wouldn't
put much
money/effort into repairing a laptop after the 2 year mark.

That being said, I usually get more than 2 years out of my
laptops,
but I baby them, so they have really easy lives, but I still
wouldn't
put much into any of them except the one that is under 2
years old.

Brian

On 10/10/2014 09:42 AM, Michael Havens wrote:

it is a 3 year old compaq. not that old!

:-)~MIKE~(-:

On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 9:39 AM,
techli...@phpcoderusa.com
mailto:techli...@phpcoderusa.com
mailto:techlists@phpcoderusa.__com
mailto:techli...@phpcoderusa.com wrote:

 How old is the laptop and what brand?



 On 2014-10-10 11:35, Michael Havens wrote:

 On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 10:14 AM,
techli...@phpcoderusa.com
mailto:techli...@phpcoderusa.com
 mailto:techlists@phpcoderusa.__com
mailto:techli...@phpcoderusa.com wrote:

 My question is what is the computer used
for?  Are you
using it
 for your Linux from scratch project?


 Well what happened is I was using my laptop
as my main
computer
 (which I have since learned is BAD); I was
running everything
 through
 it. Then the card reader didn't work. No
problem, I rarely
use that
 feature anyways and I got a USB Multicard
Reader/Writer. Then
 certain
 keys started not working (and things were
progressively getting
 worse). No problem, I got a USB keyboard/mouse.
Then when I
was at
 the airport to go to FL I found the internet
switch didn't work.
 Time
 to take it to a repair shop. Well, I can still
use it for
finances
 until I get it to a shop when I return from
Surfside. Then
the fan
 wasn't working. Then I got back from FL and
took the computer
to a
 repair shop SO I then took my Linux from
Scratch computer
and
 turned it into my central computer. This means
I'll have to get
 another computer for Linux from Scratch and
start all over with
 LFS. I
 told the lady at the repair shop about the fan,
the dropping
 keys, and
 the internet switch (forgot about the reader).
She got back
to me
 yesterday and said that the fan was working
just fine and
that the
 keyboard needed to be replaced. I inquired
about the internet
switch
 and she said it was a part of the keyboard. I'm
now thinking
 that the
 card reader is a