[ale] Losing stability

[nedj10 at gmail.com]

just a thought but hdd's dont normally cause bios beeps. The easiest test of the drive is unplug the power and ide/scsi cable boot the machine and see if the machine will post but complain about the missing boot device.
Ned

-----Original Message-----

From:  Andrew Brown <dutch_developer at bellsouth.net>
To: ale at ale.org
Subj:  Re: [ale] Losing stability
Date:  Mon Oct 30, 2006 3:30 pm
Size:  3K
To:  Atlanta Linux Enthusiasts <ale at ale.org>

Another lil cheat is to run knoppix or other live cd linux flavor. If it
boots up and runs on the disk without the beeps or sticking, then you
know it is the HD and not the mboard, memory or the cd drive... if you
are getting the same problems you know it likely isn't the HD. Running
this with the memory check will give you a broader look at what could be
the cause. 

Just a thought... 

On Mon, 2006-10-30 at 13:40 -0500, Charles Shapiro wrote:
> Heck, I ain't going to make it out to Fry's 'til next Saturday or so.
> And a positive finding from memtest86 would be a useful datum. I just
> downloaded & burned the CD and can slap it on my machine tonight
> without too much pain. So for me it's a reasonable bet.  I'll also
> open the machine (again) and look MB and possibly the video card over
> for burned caps, although from what I've read that's not too
> definitive either, since they can be blown without outside symptoms.
> Again, a positive diagnosis would be useful, even though a negative
> finding doesn't necessarily show that there ain't a problem.
> 
> Thanks for your help. More when I know more.
> 
> -- CHS
> 
> 
> On 10/30/06, Matt Kubilus <mattkubilus at gmail.com> wrote:
>         I'm just saying, save your time and just swap the RAM with a
>         known
>         good.  I've had memtest86 tell me bad RAM was fine many
>         times.  But
>         hey, what do I know, I've just seen it happen dozens of times.
>         
>         -M
>         
>         On 10/30/06, Matt Kubilus <mattkubilus at gmail.com> wrote:
>         > To prove a systems accuracy you will generally measure four
>         things:
>         >
>         >   * True positives - The system says it is so, and the
>         system is correct 
>         >   * False positives - The system says it is so, and the
>         system is wrong
>         >   * True negatives - The system says it is not so, and the
>         system is correct
>         >   * False negatives - The system says it is not so, and the
>         system is wrong 
>         >
>         > If RAM failure is the positive condition then memtest86 can
>         be said to
>         > have a high rate of false negatives.  Or so a system auditor
>         might
>         > say.  The company I used to work for was regulated by the
>         FDA.  Any 
>         > new software & hardware systems would have to meet certain
>         reliability
>         > requirements defined as above; in other words, a huge pain
>         in the
>         > rear.
>         >
>         > Good luck getting your system back up! 
>         >
>         > -Matt
>         >
>         >
>         > On 10/30/06, Jim Popovitch <jimpop at yahoo.com> wrote:
>         > > On Mon, 2006-10-30 at 12:50 -0500, Matt Kubilus wrote:
>         > > > memtest86 is only really useful to prove that the memory
>         is bad, not 
>         > > > that the memory is good.
>         > >
>         > > It's orientation is binary, right?  If not bad, then
>         good.  Or am I
>         > > missing something?
>         > >
>         > > -Jim P.
>         > >
>         > > 
>         > >
>         > > _______________________________________________
>         > > Ale mailing list
>         > > Ale at ale.org
>         > > http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
>         > >
>         >
>         >

--- message truncated ---