On Fri, Jan 06, 2012 at 12:29:50PM -0800,amy...@gmail.com wrote:
> > Is the problem only on 64-bit machines? The one I have at 252 days
> > uptime is 32-bit.
>
> According to what I've read, (1) the bug occurs on both 32-bit and
> 64-bit machines; (2) virtual machines are not affected; (3) only t
>> Is the problem only on 64-bit machines? The one I have at 252 days
>> uptime is 32-bit.
>
> According to what I've read, (1) the bug occurs on both 32-bit and
> 64-bit machines; (2) virtual machines are not affected; (3) only the
> Intel CPU (Pentium4 or newer) is relevant.
The 252-day-uptime
On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Bluejay Adametz wrote:
>> Is there anyone who has/had SL-6 machines running > 200 days ?
>
> I've got one that's been running for 252 days. 2.6.32-71.24.1.el6.i686.
>
>> There is a kernel bug that causes a system crash when the uptime goes
>> over 208.5 days. This
> Is there anyone who has/had SL-6 machines running > 200 days ?
I've got one that's been running for 252 days. 2.6.32-71.24.1.el6.i686.
> There is a kernel bug that causes a system crash when the uptime goes
> over 208.5 days. This was noted by an Scientific Linux user on the SL
> Japanese maili
On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 8:00 AM, Akemi Yagi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Is there anyone who has/had SL-6 machines running > 200 days ?
>
> There is a kernel bug that causes a system crash when the uptime goes
> over 208.5 days. This was noted by an Scientific Linux user on the SL
> Japanese mailing list [1].
Hi,
Is there anyone who has/had SL-6 machines running > 200 days ?
There is a kernel bug that causes a system crash when the uptime goes
over 208.5 days. This was noted by an Scientific Linux user on the SL
Japanese mailing list [1].
According to available info, the patch [2] is now in kernel 3.
