Re: eb164 63 MB limit?

Rolf Karlstad (karlstad@jwhp.spa.umn.edu)
Fri, 8 Nov 1996 18:45:55 -0600 (CST)

(With apologies if I am creating too many layers of threads here)

> On Fri, 8 Nov 1996, Rolf Karlstad wrote:
>
> > Well, reading through the deluge of mail on this list, I think that I have made
> > a (dissapointing) realization.
> >
> > 63 MB is really the limit with my eb164 and RedHat Linux.
>
> Have you seen the posts about my continuing problems with large memory
> sizes on my universal desktop boxes? There may be a common problem here.

Yes, and I HAD experimented earlier with 32 MB, I guess that I had noticed that
it was more stable, but had shut my eyes to that realization and plowed ahead
with the full 128 MB. I suppose my rationale was that if I had paid for the
RAM, I had better damn well use it all.. :P Then, this frantic afternoon, I
realized that I had read about an Alphastation with 128MB, an eb164 with 256MB
and another with 128 MB -- and your UDB with 64, and tried 63... it really does
seem to work so far. virtual console #7 is not filled with bogus memory
addresses, AND, fsck didn't crash while validating my old /usr partition.
fsck crashed consistently with 128 MB, milo 2.0.22, and kernel 2.0.18.
>
> > Also, of course, / and /usr must be on the same partition. (4.0 bug)
>
> Move all of the libnss_* files from /usr/lib to /lib. This will cure the
> problem with rebooting when /usr is on its own partition.
>
Oops, I suppose I should have thought of that, but too late now. I suppose
that having the two together isn't THAT bad.

> > I am reinstalling now with no apparent problems with milo configured to 63 MB.
> > Just moments ago, with 128 MB set as MEMORY_SIZE (in milo..) mkswap crashed,
> > then later, (with swap ignored for the meanwhile) the installer crashed while
> > unpacking the xf86 package.
>
> Ya know I never tried this with my problem. I will try putting my memory
> back in and rebooting as a 63 MB machine and see what happens.
>
> > Well, I'll run like this for a while, hopefully I can build a kernel that will
> > support 128 MB -- PLEASE, though, if anybody knows anything about this
> > disturbing aspect of Linux, let me (us?) know.
>
> I'm investigating the cause of the problem on my system as I write this
> (plowing through kernel source to be exact). I'll let you know what I
> find.
>
this is the most exciting part, as I definitely would rather have 128 MB,
if I can test a kernel for you please let me know.

> --
> invid@optera.com | We are Grey
> http://www.optera.com/~invid | We stand between the Candle and the Star
> | Between the Darkness and the Light
>

Rolf Karlstad
Physics
University of Minnesota

--
To unsubscribe: send e-mail to axp-list-request@redhat.com with
'unsubscribe' as the subject.  Do not send it to axp-list@redhat.com



Feedback | Store | News | Support | Product Errata | About Us | Linux Info | Search | JumpWords
No Frames | Show Frames

Copyright © 1995-1997 Red Hat Software. Legal notices