1 |
> Now wait a minute, not everyone has $100k to spend on a brand new |
2 |
> laptop. I'm a student, and I have a single computer to last me through |
3 |
> two years of highschool and and at least a few years of college, and |
4 |
> there's no way I'm going to screw up my computer without some |
5 |
> insurance, ok? Before I run anything on this machine, I'm going to |
6 |
> make sure that I'm still under warrantee, whether the parts are user |
7 |
> servicable or not. Now if you call that being silly, then that's your |
8 |
> choice, but it's my choice if I want to be cautious, even overly so. |
9 |
Keep in mind the programs mentioned are not supposed to break your |
10 |
hardware but to discover if its already got problems. Yes, they do |
11 |
put stress on various components, but thats the entire point - a lot |
12 |
of issues don't show themselves under 'normal' usage. |
13 |
|
14 |
> On that note, I did buck up and run memtest86+ from a Ubuntu livecd, |
15 |
> and after several loops (about 1h 30 min of straight testing) I didn't |
16 |
> get a single error. It was on Test #6 when I stopped, so I think the |
17 |
> memory's chill. Besides, as I said before, when I run anything GUI |
18 |
> (enlightement, right now), it's fine. I just have to jump in and out |
19 |
> of terminal really quickly. The fact that it likes to crash after |
20 |
> starting x server twice makes me think I might have a few damaged |
21 |
> portions on my harddrive. Does that sound about right? Of course, that |
22 |
> sounds like it could be a kernel issue too. If I can figure out how to |
23 |
> "downgrade" my kernel, maybe that will solve it. |
24 |
Try 'badblocks' from a livecd. Its got a read-only mode which will |
25 |
not harm your existing data. This is sounding more and more like a |
26 |
kernel issue. You haven't mentioned the specs on your laptop, but its |
27 |
a recent core 2 model, you'll find its devices are poorly supported in |
28 |
anything less that 2.6.19 / 2.6.20. |
29 |
|
30 |
Wil |
31 |
|
32 |
> |
33 |
> I just clicked the "<<plain text" button and the setting has held for |
34 |
> this entire thread. Come to think of it, I may have actually converted |
35 |
> it back to Rich Text a few weeks back. |
36 |
> |
37 |
> -Peter |
38 |
> |
39 |
> On 5/15/07, Peter Hoff <petehoff@×××××××.net> wrote: |
40 |
> > |
41 |
> > |
42 |
> > |
43 |
> > ----- Original Message ---- |
44 |
> > From: Peter Davoust <worldgnat@×××××.com> |
45 |
> > To: gentoo-amd64@l.g.o |
46 |
> > Sent: Monday, May 14, 2007 7:11:20 PM |
47 |
> > Subject: Re: [gentoo-amd64] Gentoo crashing? |
48 |
> > |
49 |
> > I know it doesn't actually burn the cpu, but I'd rather not cook any |
50 |
> > components if I don't have to. From what I know of torture tests, they run |
51 |
> > the cpu so hot it starts making computational errors, am I right? It still |
52 |
> > makes me nervous. I was hoping to be able to fix the issue just by |
53 |
> > recompiling my kernel, but no such luck. I'll mess with it some more and see |
54 |
> > what I can do. Can you give me any advice as to what I should to to a) not |
55 |
> > violate my warrantee and b) avoid killing my computer as much as possible? |
56 |
> > Could it just be something with my Gentoo install? I guess that's a stupid |
57 |
> > question; I've had this problem on an older computer, but it was a Desktop |
58 |
> > and it was much easier to swap components without messing up my warrantee. |
59 |
> > So if it were a hardware problem, wouldn't you think that suse 10.2 would |
60 |
> > have run into it as well? I used to run 10.2 (used to as in 3 days ago) for |
61 |
> > hours on end without any problems at all. I agree that Gentoo can run the |
62 |
> > computer harder, but that doesn't quite click. |
63 |
> > |
64 |
> > -Peter |
65 |
> > |
66 |
> > |
67 |
> > |
68 |
> > You're being silly. Software torture tests are not going to kill your |
69 |
> > hardware. Just run them and see what you get. Memtest will give you the |
70 |
> > address where the error occured, and I've always been able to determine |
71 |
> > which stick was bad from that, using a little deductive reasoning (I usually |
72 |
> > verify by testing the sticks alone, but so far I've not been wrong). |
73 |
> > |
74 |
> > As for voiding your warranty, memory and the hard drive are typically |
75 |
> > considered user-servicable parts. In fact, most of the time if either of |
76 |
> > those are the problem they'll just send you the parts and you'll have to |
77 |
> > replace them yourself anyway. |
78 |
> > |
79 |
> > More on torturing hardware: really, the only component that's at all |
80 |
> > vulnerable to this is the hard drive, simply because it's a mechanical |
81 |
> > device, but it will take an absurdly long time to do any actual damage. I |
82 |
> > used to test hard drives for video servers (think Tivo, but starting at |
83 |
> > $100k). We tried a wide variety of drive testing suites, but it turned out |
84 |
> > none of them ran the drives harder than our normal application. A surprising |
85 |
> > number of the oldest version of our product are still running, on the |
86 |
> > original drives, after over 10 years, in situations that are very demanding |
87 |
> > (like serving multiple channels for DirecTV). So, really, stop being so |
88 |
> > paranoid about software torture tests. It is a complete myth that you can |
89 |
> > ruin your hardware by running them. |
90 |
> > |
91 |
> > |
92 |
> > |
93 |
> -- |
94 |
> gentoo-amd64@g.o mailing list |
95 |
> |
96 |
> |
97 |
-- |
98 |
gentoo-amd64@g.o mailing list |