Fwd: dilyard 08/09/01:05.30 system check

2001-08-09 Thread Douglas J. Hunley
a slightly bigger log of the same thing anyone? -- Forwarded Message -- Subject: dilyard 08/09/01:05.30 system check Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2001 05:30:01 -0400 From: dilyard root [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unusual System Events =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Aug 9 05:16:46

Re: Fwd: dilyard 08/09/01:05.30 system check

2001-08-09 Thread Mike Andrew
On Thursday 09 August 2001 23:45, Douglas J. Hunley wrote: a slightly bigger log of the same thing anyone? Aug 9 05:16:46 dilyard kernel: Unable to handle kernel paging request at [snip] change your memory AND your video card. -- http://linux.nf -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Fwd: dilyard 08/09/01:05.30 system check

2001-08-09 Thread Mike Andrew
On Friday 10 August 2001 03:39, Net Llama wrote: Since changing both memory videocard are a rather expensive solution, i'd save that one for last until all other culprits are ruled out. At the very least, running the box on memtest86 or cerberus would be advised before replacing any

Re: Fwd: dilyard 08/09/01:05.30 system check

2001-08-09 Thread Aaron Grewell
I'll second that. Consider the cost of a cheapo AGP card and a 100MHz SDRAM module over against the time you'll spend messing around with your configuration. You can keep the spares as known-good stuff and use them many times for testing your various boxen, and then if you need them you're up

Re: Fwd: dilyard 08/09/01:05.30 system check

2001-08-09 Thread Net Llama
--- Mike Andrew [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Friday 10 August 2001 03:39, Net Llama wrote: Since changing both memory videocard are a rather expensive solution, i'd save that one for last until all other culprits are ruled out. At the very least, running the box on memtest86 or

Re: Fwd: dilyard 08/09/01:05.30 system check

2001-08-09 Thread Douglas J. Hunley
On Thursday 09 August 2001 14:39, Net Llama babbled: Oops's are rarely that easy to resolve. In fact, they are very, very rarely hardware based. Without more information, this is all purely speculation. to try memtest on it.. what more info would help Lonni? -- Douglas J. Hunley ([EMAIL

Re: Fwd: dilyard 08/09/01:05.30 system check

2001-08-09 Thread Douglas J. Hunley
On Thursday 09 August 2001 12:07, Net Llama babbled: Another of what same thing? This is the first time i've seen you (doug) send anything like this to the list. should have been #2... version 2.2.19 (with ext3). I shall attempt ksymoops later.. user's desktop. on 24x7. connected to cable

Re: Fwd: dilyard 08/09/01:05.30 system check

2001-08-09 Thread Net Llama
--- Douglas J. Hunley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thursday 09 August 2001 14:39, Net Llama babbled: Oops's are rarely that easy to resolve. In fact, they are very, very rarely hardware based. Without more information, this is all purely speculation. to try memtest on it.. what

Re: Fwd: dilyard 08/09/01:05.30 system check

2001-08-09 Thread Net Llama
--- Douglas J. Hunley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thursday 09 August 2001 12:07, Net Llama babbled: Another of what same thing? This is the first time i've seen you (doug) send anything like this to the list. should have been #2... version 2.2.19 (with ext3). I shall attempt ksymoops

Re: Fwd: dilyard 08/09/01:05.30 system check

2001-08-09 Thread Douglas J. Hunley
On Thursday 09 August 2001 16:33, Net Llama babbled: Any NFS usage? I think the ksymoops output will be the most telling of what caused this. nope. nfs not even compiled in... -- Douglas J. Hunley ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - Linux User #174778 Admin: http://hunley.homeip.net/Admin: