> Right, I remember. Others did too, however from all the info my
> brain took in from multiple sources it appeared that 2.2.12 was
> worse. Perhaps that was not correct, but that is how I saw it so
> I stayed with 11. I had a very long uptime indeed! This only
> made me feel even safer with it...
2.2.11 has a Tcp/Ip memory leak in it where as 2.2.12 has a slow page
leak.. my "guess" is most people tend to use more tcp/ip on there Linux
boxes than pageing . I am suprised indeed that you had such long
uptimes with 2.2.11
> >There is a patch agains 2.2.11 so if you are bent on staying
> >with 2.2.11 then get the patch. I have had 2.2.12 and my
> >machine has been up for 15 days so far(9:01pm up 14 days
> >23:01), I had a problem after 9 days and rebooted this time it
> >is about 15. There is also a patch for 2.2.12 and its slow page
> >mem leak, but I am not sure how to apply that as patch -p0 <
> ><patch> did not seem to work for me, but I am sure it was
> >something I was doing wrong.
>
> Allright, I will roll a 2.2.12 kernel as soon as someone tells me
> where to get the patch to fix it is. Or should I get the latest
> pre-13 patch?
I have not tried any of the 2.2.13 kernels yet so cannot say.. with
2.2.12 I am just watching my system closely watching the system to see
'signs' that it is starting to act funny, paying particular attention to
the memory. With 2.2.11 my system froze completely, where as 2.2.12 has
not done that.
If you want to run 2.2.11 pathced the patch is at
http://www.linux.org.uk/VERSION/relnotes.2211.html
the patch for 2.2.12 is
http://www.linux.org.uk/VERSION/relnotes.2212.html
Oh some of the "signs" that I watch for are programs behaving
differently. One example is a program I had written in Perl::Tk. After
my system was up for 15 days the program would crash an window redraws.
If I opened up a gnome term it may crash, if I had two instances opend
it would crash if I minimized one. After I re****ed (bad word on this
list :-O) the system the crashes went away. Apparently the memory had
gotton to low or something and was causing the crashes. And no it was
not my code as it is fine after the re****.
Personally I wish that when 2.2.11 was released and found to have a mem
leak it was either pulled or 2.2.12 was released with just the fix for
2.2.11. If you patch 2.2.11 you cannot then patch it to 2.2.12 without
modifing the 2.2.12 patch. 2.2.13 should have been released with just a
fix for 2.2.12, but that is just my opinion. Incidentally this prompted
me to write a little gnome app to show my uptime in the gnome panel :-)
> Hmm.. I don't recall that, but if true, I will just uninstall it
> and reinstall. I need to upgrade to the latest version anyways.
I think it prompts something like "vmware does not have modukles for
your system, do you want it to build them for you?" This could be
because I have an smp system and they may not distribute smp modules.
> Probably vmware. I had trouble with that too a long while back.
> Not any more though. VMWARE has been pretty solid. The only
> complaints that I have are that it can't change resolution to
> anything other than what X is using at the time. This sucks
> bigtime as a fullscreen application ends up in 640x480 centered
> on the 1024.768 screen... ;o(
did you get the additional utilities they have? I run "that other OS"
(hope this acts as flame retardant :-O) under vmware at 800x600 and can
get it up to 1024x768.. in full screen mode.. no problems..
> Yep, I pointed this out allready too.
doh!
> Actually, I understand that their parport driver is GPL, and is
> just a modified version of the existing Linux parport driver.
I only wonder why they do not use the existing drivers and they write
there own?
-- Joseph..... SMP Linux / NT 4.0 / FreeBSD
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/