o try memtest86 before you change it to confirm that it fails now but
> works if you drop it to 100.
>
I'd go along with this, I used memtest86 with mine - I was sure that the
problem wasnt with my RAM. I run a memtest session - I took a while but
it came back with around 10,000 errors! I
> Which chip did you pull to get everything working right? Was it the
> PC133 by any chance?
No, the PC133 is the one in there now.
PC133 - 256mb chip
PC100 - 128mb chip
.salvatore
http://www.sienar.org/
http://www.palmisanonet.com/
--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROT
On Wed, Oct 22, 2003 at 10:50:22AM -0400, salvatore wrote:
> There are three settings in BIOS:
> 133
> 100
> By Spd
>
> 133 and 100 are self explanatory, but what's 'by spd'? That it'll attempt
> to read the speed of the individual chips?
> I did notice one of the chips is 133 and the other two a
>chips and would crash during the installation process - you might
>remember my posting a few months ago ;)
I joined the list this morning, but its good to know someone else had the
same thing happen as I did.
>I sorted mine by just lowering the speed the RAM was running in the
>BIOS
Just a suggestion, but I had a similar problem when installing RH. The
very same RAM chips had been in the box for nearly a year and I'd not
had any corruption etc when using winXP. RH9 decided not to like the
chips and would crash during the installation process - you might
remember my post
>the system. Bad ram, especially non error-correcting ram, can cause you
>all sorts of grief from random crashes to disk corruption. Slow you can
>live with - disk corruption you probably can't.
Perfect sense. Thanks.
.salvatore
http://www.sienar.org/
http://www.pa
On Wed, Oct 22, 2003 at 09:26:49AM -0400, salvatore wrote:
> I narrowed down my install woes to a RAM chip in the system, removed it, and
> installed rh9 with no problems.
> With only 256mb, the system performance is less than desirable; since the
> POST sees all of the chips just f
Newbie posting.
RH 9 on a PIV 1.4 w/256mb RAM
I narrowed down my install woes to a RAM chip in the system, removed it, and
installed rh9 with no problems.
With only 256mb, the system performance is less than desirable; since the
POST sees all of the chips just fine, and the install is finished
MB approx
Is this the correct/appropriate size for a 128 MB RAM machine? If not
how can I alter the swap size?
I checked out the output of 'top' The SWAP field is showing that a process
called 'X' is using 64 MB of Swap and gnome-terminal is using 4 MB of Swap
So since SWAP is not sh
Dear Alexey Fadyushin,
Thanx for your response.
Alexey Fadyushin wrote:
>Did you consider the "free" command?
>On the line marked "-/+ buffers" it shows the amounts of free RAM and
>RAM used by applications. When this line shows that the amount of used
.
Did you consider the "free" command?
On the line marked "-/+ buffers" it shows the amounts of free RAM and
RAM used by applications. When this line shows that the amount of used
RAM is near the amount of the installed RAM you may consider the
installation of additional RA
Dear List.
I did not find any interface to search this list, so please
pardon me if this question has already been asked.
I have Redhat 8.0 installed on a machine which has 128 MB RAM
and 40 GB hard disk space.
How do I determine that my system is running low on RAM memory?
Meaning which
I would check the mobo manual and see if you have to reset a jumper
somewhere. Also, the voltage on the pc100 RAM may not be compatible with
the mobo. If all else fails, take the memory to a shop that has a
tester and get it tested. It may have gotten zapped.
BTW, if you get into Crucial&#
Silkk - Try here:
http://www2.driverguide.com/uploads/uploads6/15171.html
Good Luck
Mike Wafkowski
- Original Message -
From: "Silkk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2003 1:39 AM
Subject: Re: RedHat Wont Reconize my DIMM ram (M
Opps sorry yah i meant to say i really couldnt even find something that much newer.
That
would make much of a difference.
http://www.wimsbios.com/index.htm?/HTML1/xpro.html
Someone else was looking for it here but someone mentioned about paying money but i
probably not going that route
http://w
Silkk wrote:
I have been "searching" for a BIOS update for the BIOS running Linux but couldnt find
anything? Any HELP???
You have NOT searched very hard then have you?
A google search on M537 BIOS yields
http://th2chips.freeservers.com/m537/bios/
As the VERY FIRST link.
Listing about 6 version
Thomas E. Dukes wrote:
I ran into the same problem here. I have a Intel SE440BX-2 board. I
bought the cheapo stick of 128 MB SDRAM. It won't work. Have to buy
the more expensive one that is "guaranteed". It won't use the PC100/133
memory has to be strictly PC100. These (this) board has only
I have been "searching" for a BIOS update for the BIOS running Linux but couldnt find
anything? Any HELP???
Is updating the BIOS would even help? What do you guys think?
"Motherboard" is:
PC Chips
Model M537
And the "BIOS" info is:
Award Modular BIOS v4.51PG
Award Bios id string 07/04/97-VXPro
The memory i put in and tryed is:
Hyundai
HYM7V65801
PC100-322-620
--- Edward Dekkers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mike Wafkowski wrote:
>
> > Follow Up - That board is from '97. It's possible that it won't work with
> > PC100 ram and certainly won
ject: Re: RedHat Wont Reconize my DIMM ram (Memory not
> even on POST)
>
>
> Mike Wafkowski wrote:
>
> > Follow Up - That board is from '97. It's possible that it
> won't work
> > with PC100 ram and certainly won't work with pc133 ram.
>
Mike Wafkowski wrote:
Follow Up - That board is from '97. It's possible that it won't work with
PC100 ram and certainly won't work with pc133 ram. What kind of 64 meg stick
did you stick in?
HHmm. I've been building system since '97 and it's been my experience
day, June 24, 2003 10:16 PM
Subject: Re: RedHat Wont Reconize my DIMM ram (Memory not even on POST)
> Silkk wrote:
>
> > Hii...im running RedHat 7.3. (2.4.20) I was using 64mb (2) 32 pin simm
Ram. But then i
> > took that out and added 1 64mb 168 pin Dimm Ram but then when my sy
Follow Up - That board is from '97. It's possible that it won't work with
PC100 ram and certainly won't work with pc133 ram. What kind of 64 meg stick
did you stick in?
Regards,
MRW
- Original Message -
From: "Silkk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[E
Silkk wrote:
Hii...im running RedHat 7.3. (2.4.20) I was using 64mb (2) 32 pin simm Ram. But then i
took that out and added 1 64mb 168 pin Dimm Ram but then when my system boots up it
wont
recognize it on the BOOT SCREEN (POST) or when i run the command "free" when i boot
into
linux
Does the Mobo recognize the ram on boot up? If not, how would RH recognize
it?
Try reinserting it in a different memory slot. Is is compatible memory (not
ECC, etc)?
MRW
- Original Message -
From: "Silkk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesd
Hii...im running RedHat 7.3. (2.4.20) I was using 64mb (2) 32 pin simm Ram. But then i
took that out and added 1 64mb 168 pin Dimm Ram but then when my system boots up it
wont
recognize it on the BOOT SCREEN (POST) or when i run the command "free" when i boot
into
linux prompt. I was
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wednesday 18 June 2003 03:04 pm, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
[...]
> from what i've read, i can create a number of ram disks
> corresponding to /dev/ram[012345...], by doing the following:
>
> # dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/ram0 bs=1024
HD activity, so there's certainly *potential*
> > for reducing disk activity.
>
> I can't help with RAM disks, however, I just thought I'd remind you that
> to be fair you need to add the time it takes to create the RAM disk and
> copy the data to it to whatever
ing disk activity.
I can't help with RAM disks, however, I just thought I'd remind you that
to be fair you need to add the time it takes to create the RAM disk and
copy the data to it to whatever time result your compile-from-ramdisk
works out to be.
--
+- Chr
On Wed, 18 Jun 2003, Jonathan Bartlett wrote:
> I don't know the answers to your questions, however, you probably don't
> want RAM disks anyway.
>
> The kernel does a _great_ job of managing what's in memory and what isn't.
> In fact, I'm not sure havi
I don't know the answers to your questions, however, you probably don't
want RAM disks anyway.
The kernel does a _great_ job of managing what's in memory and what isn't.
In fact, I'm not sure having a RAM disk keeps it in RAM - it _may_ keep it
in swap (i.e. - on disk
i'm trying to figure out what i can and can't do with
ram disks, so let me explain what i've found so far, and
perhaps someone can fill in the gaps.
by "ram disk", i don't mean the boot-time initrd image.
i mean setting aside an arbitrary amount of R
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sunday 16 February 2003 20:30, Michael Rubin wrote:
> I've currently got 1 Gig of ram, not sure the exact specifications of
> the chips. The MB takes up to 6 chips. I would like to add another
> 512 or Gig. If I just physically add
I've currently got 1 Gig of ram, not sure the exact specifications of the
chips. The MB takes up to 6 chips. I would like to add another 512 or Gig.
If I just physically add the chips and turn the machine (RH 7.1) back on,
will it be fine (just like windows?) ? Or are there some sp
I have seen a few that require ECC, but more often seen MBs that do
non-ECC...usually server MBs that seem to require ECC.
On Sun, 26 Jan 2003, Ashley M. Kirchner wrote:
> greg wrote:
>
> >Thanks Jonathan and Mike. I will get the non ecc ram then, much
> >cheaper.
> >
greg wrote:
Thanks Jonathan and Mike. I will get the non ecc ram then, much
cheaper.
As Jonathan pointed out, make sure your motherboard supports
non-ECC. I have boards that can support both, and two that only take
ECC registered. If your board doesn't support non-ECC, you m
Thanks Jonathan and Mike. I will get the non ecc ram then, much
cheaper.
regards Greg
On Mon, 2003-01-27 at 11:18, Jonathan M. Slivko wrote:
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Greg,
>
> ECC RAM is usually used for servers or for people tha
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Greg,
ECC RAM is usually used for servers or for people that absolutely need the
functionality that it provides. If your not going to be running beneficial services on
it, non-ECC should do the trick for ya.
- -- Jonathan
P.S. Make sure that
ECC is error correcting.
On 27 Jan 2003, greg wrote:
> Sorry for the off topic post, but I am having trouble finding any data
> on this. I am buying some faster ram in the next few days. When looking
> around there are a couple of things I am not sure on. I know I want the
> pc2
Sorry for the off topic post, but I am having trouble finding any data
on this. I am buying some faster ram in the next few days. When looking
around there are a couple of things I am not sure on. I know I want the
pc2700 type ram (333mhz). I would like to use Kingston, as that is what
I use
Yes, it is a live server. It had 1.25 GB RAM in it. For new applications
and new growth, that was deemed too little. We decided to max it out while
memory prices are reasonable. So, this morning I installed 6 GB. The
server has a "regular" SMP kernel, and only sees 4 GB of the 6
On Tue, 2003-01-21 at 09:45, Turner, John wrote:
>
> Actually, I think building from source is my only option, unless the bigmem
> kernel is SMP. Any ideas how I might go about confirming if it is or not
> without trying the bigmem kernel on my production server?
Sure. Install the kernel, but d
On Tue, 2003-01-21 at 09:51, Werner Puschitz wrote:
>
> On 21 Jan 2003, Gordon Messmer wrote:
> > Why does everyone keep suggesting kernel compiles when Red Hat provides
> > the 'kernel-bigmem' kernel which is suitable and supported?
> >
> > https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2002-292.html#Red%20
On 21 Jan 2003, Gordon Messmer wrote:
> On Tue, 2003-01-21 at 08:44, Nick Lindsell wrote:
> > The memory limit for 7.2 is that of the kernel. I believe that the default
> > Redhat 7.2
> > kernel supports 4GB, however the 2.4 kernels will support up to 64GB if
> > configured
> > correctly.
> > I
TECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 12:40 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Max amount of RAM in 7.2 question
>
>
> On Tue, 2003-01-21 at 08:44, Nick Lindsell wrote:
> > The memory limit for 7.2 is that of the kernel. I believe
> that the default
>
31smp kernel). Up
> until this morning, it had 1.25 GB of RAM. This morning I installed 6 GB
> RAM, replacing the existing 1.25 GB. The hardware supports 6 GB, and 6 GB
> shows up fine in the BIOS POST.
>
> However, dmesg, /proc/meminfo, and "free -m" shows that only 4 GB
On Tue, 2003-01-21 at 08:44, Nick Lindsell wrote:
> The memory limit for 7.2 is that of the kernel. I believe that the default
> Redhat 7.2
> kernel supports 4GB, however the 2.4 kernels will support up to 64GB if
> configured
> correctly.
> Install the kernel source tree with rpm, then:-
>
> cd
It does. Thank you very much for replying.
John
> -Original Message-
> From: gabriel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 11:31 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Max amount of RAM in 7.2 question
>
>
> from the k
"permanently mapped" by the kernel. The physical memory that's not
permanently mapped is called "high memory".
If you are compiling a kernel which will never run on a machine with more
than 960 megabytes of total physical RAM, answer "off" here (default choice
and
21, 2003 5:15 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Robert Adkins
Subject: Re: Max amount of RAM in 7.2 question
Isn't 4 GB the maximum addressable space in an architecture that uses
32-bit
addressing?
- Original Message -
From: "Turner, John" <[EM
Excellent. Thank you for replying!
John
> -Original Message-
> From: Bret Hughes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 11:58 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Max amount of RAM in 7.2 question
>
>
> On Tue, 2003-01-21 at 1
Rockin'! Thank you for replying. Looks like I have some testing to do.
John
> -Original Message-
> From: Nick Lindsell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 11:45 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Max amount of RAM in 7.2 question
&g
On Tue, 2003-01-21 at 10:19, Turner, John wrote:
>
> Ugh. I hope not. I wonder why a motherboard would support 6 GB, then.
> I've never worked with Linux with more than 2GB, so I've never run into this
> issue before. Machines that have had 4 or 8 GB (or more) of RAM for
t had 1.25 GB of RAM. This morning I installed 6 GB
RAM, replacing the existing 1.25 GB. The hardware supports 6 GB, and 6 GB
shows up fine in the BIOS POST.
However, dmesg, /proc/meminfo, and "free -m" shows that only 4 GB was picked
up when the server was restarted.
Is 4 GB a hard m
Ugh. I hope not. I wonder why a motherboard would support 6 GB, then.
I've never worked with Linux with more than 2GB, so I've never run into this
issue before. Machines that have had 4 or 8 GB (or more) of RAM for me have
always been Solaris or AIX boxes.
John
> -Ori
Isn't 4 GB the maximum addressable space in an architecture that uses 32-bit
addressing?
- Original Message -
From: "Turner, John" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 4:18 PM
Subject: Max amount of RAM in 7.2 question
,
Robert Adkins II
IT Manager/Buyer
Impel Industries, Inc.
Ph. 586-254-5800
Fx. 586-254-5804
-Original Message-
From: Turner, John [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 10:18 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Robert Adkins
Subject: Max amount of RAM in 7.2
Greetings -
I've scoured Google and redhat.com most of the morning for a specific
answer, but haven't found it. Hopefully someone here will have it.
I have a Compaq ProLiant server with RH 7.2 SMP (2.4.9-31smp kernel). Up
until this morning, it had 1.25 GB of RAM. This morning I i
On Mon, 2003-01-06 at 12:13, Nuno Rodrigues wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I have two servers with RH 7.3 and 2048MB RAM.
> When i upgrated the kernel to smp-2.4.18-18.7.x the system only
> recognise 902482 KB of memory.
> I added "append="mem=2048M"" in /et
Hello,
I have two servers with RH 7.3 and 2048MB RAM.
When i upgrated the kernel to smp-2.4.18-18.7.x the system only
recognise 902482 KB of memory.
I added "append="mem=2048M"" in /etc/lilo.conf and run /sbin/lilo and
the problem it is remained... :(
Can anybody hel
Daevid Vincent wrote:
>
> I use GRUB. Is there an equivillent command for that?
>
Don't bother adding the mem= parameter. The output from free that you
gave:
total used free sharedbuffers
cached
Mem:643140 632108 11032 0 3924
i
On Fri, 2002-11-29 at 10:24, moises wrote:
> Hello! I have a University project that it have to do next:
> A server that it can get the machine performance conected in a network such as:
>memory free and using, CPU percent iddle or using, Operating System, hard disk
>storage(free and Used), etc.
Hello! I have a University project that it have to do next:
A server that it can get the machine performance conected in a network such as: memory free and using, CPU percent iddle or using, Operating System, hard disk storage(free and Used), etc.
I need a C/C++ code for doing this. i've found a lo
I use GRUB. Is there an equivillent command for that?
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Try to add "append="MEM=684M" into /etc/lilo.conf
> Then run lilo...
--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=unsubscribe
https://listman.redhat.com/
our recently also.
All I did was replace a server that was a P133/64MB (2.2 kernel)
with a P-266/192MB (2.4 kernel) and interactive response
got SLOWER when it was busy.
It seems to be related to the OS gobbling up all spare ram for
cache/buffers (I don't understand the distinction between the tw
Hello
Try to add "append="MEM=684M" into /etc/lilo.conf
Then run lilo...
Hope this help !
Ed.
--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=unsubscribe
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
shortening the startup time.
I'm not familiar with Quantra so I can't comment on that.
Mozilla doesn't take anywhere near a minute to load on my system (900
MHz Athlon w/ 128 mb ram)
As far as outlook running "all the time" - I have Evolution started when
I start my XSessi
Daevid Vincent said:
> Swap: 522072 116012 406060
>
> Here is what I have running currently as of that 'free'
wonder why it's swapping like mad.
one thing I would suggest is at least temporarily disable swap.
684MB of ram is a TON of ram, and unless your
out so well that way. It takes too long to do anything.
It's embarrassing. I thought that Microsoft was always writing bloated
software, but now I'm starting to doubt that. I could add another 512MB
RAM (it's only like $175), but I'm not sure that is the problem, is it?
Why wou
igh memory".
If you are compiling a kernel which will never run on a machine with
more than 960 megabytes of total physical RAM, answer "off" here (default
choice and suitable for most users). This will result in a "3GB/1GB"
split: 3GB are mapped so that each process sees a
The maximum amount of RAM that the 2.4 kernel can map is 64GB. It is
important to recognize that when you add more memory, the kernel memory
map grows larger so you will not actually get 64GB of system-usable RAM.
For example, my box with 8GB shows the following from a 'free' comma
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 07:17:09PM +0200 or thereabouts, Teodor Georgiev wrote:
> 4GB I think.
That was pre 2.4 kernel
I am pretty sure it is up to 64 GB now.
--
Best regards,
Gary
sed '/^[when][coders]/!d
/^...[discover].$/d
/^..[real].[code]$/!d
' /usr/share/dict/words
quot; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2002 7:14 PM
> Subject: Linux Maximum Ram
>
>
> > How much ram can the 2.4.18 kernel support(Maximum system ram)?
> >
> > Thanks
> > --
> > Joe Giles
> > [EMAIL PROTEC
4GB I think.
- Original Message -
From: "Joe Giles" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Red Hat List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2002 7:14 PM
Subject: Linux Maximum Ram
> How much ram can the 2.4.18 kernel support(Maximum system ram)?
>
How much ram can the 2.4.18 kernel support(Maximum system ram)?
Thanks
--
Joe Giles
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
AOL: mcigiles
---
Registered Linux User #264910 http://counter.li.org
---
--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request@;redhat.com?subject=unsubscribe
https
Joe Giles wrote:
> Im just now reading this issue, and I was wondering. I noticed that you
> were using an older version of Linux Kernel (RH 7.1). Is this a bug with
> this version, or would this happen with newer versions as well. Or is
> this an issue with the way the Compaq server bios talks to
Im just now reading this issue, and I was wondering. I noticed that you
were using an older version of Linux Kernel (RH 7.1). Is this a bug with
this version, or would this happen with newer versions as well. Or is
this an issue with the way the Compaq server bios talks to the OS? Maybe
a RomPAQ u
Francisco Neira wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Taking a closer look to the output of "free" and "top" on a Compaq
> Proliant 3000 (oldie), noted that the kernel is reporting just about
> 16MB instead of the 256MB recognized by the BIOS at POST.
>
> My first action was to make some changes in lilo.conf (
Hi all,
Taking a closer look to the output of "free" and "top" on a Compaq
Proliant 3000 (oldie), noted that the kernel is reporting just about
16MB instead of the 256MB recognized by the BIOS at POST.
My first action was to make some changes in lilo.conf (and running lilo,
of course). I 'd p
On Mon, Aug 12, 2002 at 10:51:03AM +0530, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hi list,
>
> How do I find out how much RAM and swap is used by different
> processes? 'free' gives me a total and ps -aux gives me a %
> output. I need a per-process usage of physical and swap memor
> How do I find out how much RAM and swap is used by different
> processes? 'free' gives me a total and ps -aux gives me a %
> output. I need a per-process usage of physical and swap memory
> in MB.
Don't know about swap, but you may want to try 'top'.
Reg
Hi list,
How do I find out how much RAM and swap is used by different
processes? 'free' gives me a total and ps -aux gives me a %
output. I need a per-process usage of physical and swap memory
in MB.
TIA,
Harish
--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTE
Gustavo Facchini wrote:
> Hi
>
> Is there a place, in Red Hat, where I can see how much RAM memory is
> installed on my machine?
dmesg | grep Memory
begin:vcard
n:Chan;Arthur
tel;work:1.718.633.5892
x-mozilla-html:TRUE
url:www.saysit.com
org:SAYS I.T.
adr:;;234 E 2nd Street;Brook
ompt, type in "dmesg"
> which will scroll the startup messages - near the top should be a
> listing of memory found.
>
> HTH
> s.
>
>
> On Wed, 10 Jul 2002 02:20:22 -0300
> "Gustavo Facchini" <[EMAIL PROTE
On Tue, 9 Jul 2002 22:23:32 -0700
Steven Filling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> scribbled intuitively:
>two places -
>
>at a command prompt, type in "free -m"
>which will give you a short table of recognized and used/free memory
>
>at a command prompt, type in "dmesg"
>which will scroll the startup message
emory
found.
HTH
s.
On Wed, 10 Jul 2002 02:20:22 -0300
"Gustavo Facchini" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is there a place, in Red Hat, where I can see how much RAM memory is
> installed on my machine?
>
> If you could help me, thanks a lot!
___
Hi
Is there a place, in Red Hat, where I can see how much RAM memory is
installed on my machine?
If you could help me, thanks a lot!
Gustavo
_
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
http://photos.msn.com
At 10:18 PM -0500 5/4/02, Ed Wilts wrote:
> > so what IS the minimum ram required for an install of rh7.2? i've got an
>> ibm aptiva here /w 16mb ram and it's telling me i can't install it 'cause
>i
>> don't have enough ram
>
>According t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sunday 05 May 2002 12:44 pm, Glen Lee Edwards wrote:
> >The Rule project is here:
> >http://www.rule-project.org/
>
> I believe you have to have 20 meg to install 7.2. I just did an
> install on a 486-66 with 16 meg RAM usi
Michael Fratoni writes:
>-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>Hash: SHA1
>
>On Saturday 04 May 2002 09:44 pm, fred smith wrote:
>> On Fri, May 03, 2002 at 07:50:02PM -0700, gabriel wrote:
>> > so what IS the minimum ram required for an install of rh7.2? i've
>
Thanks, time should be fixed.
Bill
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.
pgp key: http://www.tuxfan.homeip.net:8080/gpgkey.txt
Red Hat Linux 7.2 in 8M of RAM: http://www.rule-project.org/
- --
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
iEYEARECAAYFAjzU07oACgkQn/07WoAb/SvOxwCghpODxdUkOWuiXnWOMUX3BW8y
664AnRgFw
Hi,
I've got RedHat 7.2 full install on an old aptiva 486 boosted to 100.
It's got 32 megs of memory in it and it will work pretty well but it is
very slow. If you are extremely patient (underline extremely pataient) it
will probably work quite well.
Bill
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
On Fri, 03 May 2002 19:50:02 -0700
gabriel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> quietly intimated:
> so what IS the minimum ram required for an install of rh7.2? i've got
> an ibm aptiva here /w 16mb ram and it's telling me i can't install it
> 'cause i don't have enou
> so what IS the minimum ram required for an install of rh7.2? i've got an
> ibm aptiva here /w 16mb ram and it's telling me i can't install it 'cause
i
> don't have enough ram
According to the box, 32MB for text mode and 64MB for graphical. 96MB is
recomended
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Saturday 04 May 2002 09:44 pm, fred smith wrote:
> On Fri, May 03, 2002 at 07:50:02PM -0700, gabriel wrote:
> > so what IS the minimum ram required for an install of rh7.2? i've
> > got an ibm aptiva here /w 16mb ram and it&
On Fri, May 03, 2002 at 07:50:02PM -0700, gabriel wrote:
> so what IS the minimum ram required for an install of rh7.2? i've got an
> ibm aptiva here /w 16mb ram and it's telling me i can't install it 'cause i
> don't have enough ram
Dunno, really. I've i
so what IS the minimum ram required for an install of rh7.2? i've got an
ibm aptiva here /w 16mb ram and it's telling me i can't install it 'cause i
don't have enough ram
___
Redhat-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
h
if you ahve to recompile for dual processor computers.
Mansoor Ahmed ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) said thusly on [10/02/02 at 06:33]:
> Hi,
>
> I have 2GB Ram and 2 Processor in Dell4400 Box running RedHat 7.1, OS is
> unable to see 2nd processor and RAM more then 1 GB any body can help
Hi,
I have 2GB Ram and 2 Processor in Dell4400 Box running RedHat 7.1, OS is
unable to see 2nd processor and RAM more then 1 GB any body can help in
solving this issue.
-
Mansoor Ahmed
___
Redhat-list mailing list
[EMAIL
1 - 100 of 236 matches
Mail list logo
