On Tue, Oct 31, 2006 at 02:04:50PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >So IMO this would only be useful for private use.
>
> i don`t think so - at least i wouldn`t say it`s only usefule for
> private use if you mean "home use"
>
> - think of developing countries where people cannot afford replacin
- i heard there will be an request for inclusion into mainline soon.
roland
> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> Von: Andreas Gredler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Gesendet: 30.10.06 13:55:46
> An: grml@mur.at
> Betreff: Re: [Grml] BadRam/BadMem Kernelpatch
> On Sun, Oct
On Sun, Oct 29, 2006 at 03:02:15PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Description:
>
> BadRAM: Linux kernel support for broken RAM modules Summary: This page
> proposes an approach to support RAMs with defective addresses, This
> may open interesting business perspectives, where those RAMs can be
>
t code-paths if there
isn`t "badram=" specified on the commandline.
> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> Von: Michael Prokop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Gesendet: 29.10.06 23:31:18
> An: grml@mur.at
> Betreff: Re: [Grml] BadRam/BadMem Kernelpatch
> * [EMAIL PROTECTED] &l
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [20061029 15:12]:
> Since grml seems to become more and more THE live-cd for admins,
> and maybe often being used for recovery purpose to save data from
> more or less "dead" boxes - did anybody think of taking a look at
> the BadRam Kernelpatch ?
> http://r
Hello !
Since grml seems to become more and more THE live-cd for admins, and maybe
often being used for recovery purpose to save data from more or less "dead"
boxes - did anybody think of taking a look at the BadRam Kernelpatch ?
http://rick.vanrein.org/linux/badram/index.html
