> "Dave" == Dave Sherohman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Dave> I would guess, based on their respective legacy codebases, that
Dave> Win2k uses HLT and ME/XP don't, but I haven't heard anything
Dave> definite about them to date.
AFAIK, WinXP is based on the NT codebase, just like W2k. So I woul
okay, correct me if im wrong.
When we are brought up, some are better for electronics, some for
programming. Meaning that good programmers make good programs on every
architecture. Why should decent schools stick to 68k amiga?
thorough time, I learned that good programming practice doesnt constrain
In Dave Sherohman's email, 13-07-2001:
> On Fri, Jul 13, 2001 at 12:13:20PM +0100, J.A.Serralheiro wrote:
> > On Fri, 13 Jul 2001, Alexey wrote:
> > > You know, while running DOS or Windows, the CPU is hot (I can touch it),
> > > even if I do nothing. It becomes cool under Linux!!!
> >
> > strange
On Fri, Jul 13, 2001 at 11:52:35AM -0500, Dimitri Maziuk wrote:
| * Lamer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) spake thusly:
| > > This would also (theoretically) lead to less power consumption and a
| > > lower electric bill. Pretty nice! Say, does that HLT instruction
| > > work on a i486 or only on newer CPUs?
* Lamer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) spake thusly:
> > This would also (theoretically) lead to less power consumption and a
> > lower electric bill. Pretty nice! Say, does that HLT instruction
> > work on a i486 or only on newer CPUs? I also seem to recall, back
> > when I was learning m68k assembly, tha
e FOUR letter)
upload something before downloading, or your class C IP banned.
- Original Message -
From: "D-Man" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Cc: "Dave Sherohman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 11:17 PM
Subject: Re: RAM size.
> On Fri, Jul 13,
On Fri, Jul 13, 2001 at 11:17:18AM -0400, D-Man wrote:
> This would also (theoretically) lead to less power consumption and a
> lower electric bill. Pretty nice! Say, does that HLT instruction
> work on a i486 or only on newer CPUs? I also seem to recall, back
> when I was learning m68k assembly
Subject: Re: RAM size.
Date: Fri, Jul 13, 2001 at 12:13:20PM +0100
In reply to:J.A.Serralheiro
Quoting J.A.Serralheiro([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
>
>
> On Fri, 13 Jul 2001, Alexey wrote:
>
> > > mem=128M
> > Thanks, it's OK.
> >
> > You
On Fri, Jul 13, 2001 at 09:32:54AM -0500, Dave Sherohman wrote:
| On Fri, Jul 13, 2001 at 12:13:20PM +0100, J.A.Serralheiro wrote:
| > On Fri, 13 Jul 2001, Alexey wrote:
| > > You know, while running DOS or Windows, the CPU is hot (I can touch it),
| > > even if I do nothing. It becomes cool under
On Fri, Jul 13, 2001 at 12:13:20PM +0100, J.A.Serralheiro wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Jul 2001, Alexey wrote:
> > You know, while running DOS or Windows, the CPU is hot (I can touch it),
> > even if I do nothing. It becomes cool under Linux!!!
>
> strange, never heard of that.
Linux (and NT, incidentall
On Fri, 13 Jul 2001, Alexey wrote:
> > mem=128M
> Thanks, it's OK.
>
> You know, while running DOS or Windows, the CPU is hot (I can touch it),
> even if I do nothing. It becomes cool under Linux!!!
strange, never heard of that.
I think you can workarround this by telling lilo that you have 128m of
ram.
I use loadlin, with the parameter mem=64m
I think lilo is the same, but yu should check first
see the debian instalation manual.
> mem=128M
Thanks, it's OK.
You know, while running DOS or Windows, the CPU is hot (I can touch it),
even if I do nothing. It becomes cool under Linux!!!
On Thu, Jul 12, 2001 at 08:58:45PM +0400, Alexey wrote:
> I have 128M RAM.
>
> dmesg:
> ...
> Memory: 64364k/66496k available (808k kernel code, 416k reserved, 864k data,
> 44k init)
> ...
>
> Am I right thinking that Linux "sees" 64M only?
> Well, the *free* utility displays total memory at 64M
On 12-Jul 08:58, Alexey wrote:
> I have 128M RAM.
>
> dmesg:
> ...
> Memory: 64364k/66496k available (808k kernel code, 416k reserved, 864k data,
> 44k init)
> ...
>
> Am I right thinking that Linux "sees" 64M only?
> Well, the *free* utility displays total memory at 64M.
> What's wrong?
Your B
Hi Christopher and Oliver,
Oliver Elphick wrote:
>
> Christopher Barry wrote:
> >> In /etc/lilo.conf,
> >> ...
> >> # Linux - 2.0.33
> >> image=/boot/vmlinuz-2.0.33
> >> label=linux2033
> >> append="mem=96m aic7xxx=ultra"
> >>
>
I don't have aic7xxx=ultra set at boot-time. Loo
I don't know enough about it to comment on it either. Did you add the
"aic7xxx=ultra" to 'append=' yourself though or was this done automatically?
Oliver Elphick wrote:
> Christopher Barry wrote:
> >> In /etc/lilo.conf,
> >> ...
> >> # Linux - 2.0.33
> >> image=/boot/vmlinuz-2.0.33
> >>
Christopher Barry wrote:
>> In /etc/lilo.conf,
>> ...
>> # Linux - 2.0.33
>> image=/boot/vmlinuz-2.0.33
>> label=linux2033
>> append="mem=96m aic7xxx=ultra"
>>
>
>Which specific Adaptec chipset are you using? The 7880? I have a 2940UW PCI
>card and I
I have the same ca
Oliver Elphick wrote:
> "Alex Kwan" wrote:
> >I have seen the FAQ on FreeBSD documents,
> >It was said that if the system have more than
> >64MB RAM, the user needed to use kernel
> >option specified the actual RAM size,
> >because I want to extend the RAM to 128M
> >in my Hamm, so
> It was said that if the system have more than
> 64MB RAM, the user needed to use kernel
> option specified the actual RAM size,
Yes, you do need to tell the kernel about more than 64 megs of RAM.
Assuming you
are using LILO to boot your system, just add the following line to your
/etc/lilo.
"Alex Kwan" wrote:
>I have seen the FAQ on FreeBSD documents,
>It was said that if the system have more than
>64MB RAM, the user needed to use kernel
>option specified the actual RAM size,
>because I want to extend the RAM to 128M
>in my Hamm, so I have two questions:
>(1) Does the Li
On Sat, Jul 18, 1998 at 10:44:22PM +0800, Alex Kwan wrote:
> It was said that if the system have more than
> 64MB RAM, the user needed to use kernel
> option specified the actual RAM size,
> (1) Does the Linux is seem?
> (2) If needed, how to?
You may want to try it without further options first
22 matches
Mail list logo
