From owner-freebsd-questions Fri Aug 9 22:01:48 1996 Return-Path: owner-questions Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id WAA03737 for questions-outgoing; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 22:01:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gdi.uoregon.edu (cisco-ts7-line12.uoregon.edu [128.223.150.59]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id WAA03730 for ; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 22:01:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (dwhite@localhost) by gdi.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id WAA00321; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 22:01:43 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 9 Aug 1996 22:01:43 -0700 (PDT) From: Doug White Reply-To: dwhite@resnet.uoregon.edu To: Leon Kaplan cc: questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Page faults during installation In-Reply-To: <199608082023.WAA02894@trick.cslab.tuwien.ac.at> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-questions@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Thu, 8 Aug 1996, Leon Kaplan wrote: > Are non-parity RAMs ok with FreeBSD? Is there any FAQ describing which > RAMs are considered FreeBSD compliant and which ones should be avoided? RAM parity is an issue between the BIOS and the memory, not really a operating system issue. Now, defective memory is. I'm sure you'll get lots of opinions. The best thing for you may be to find a good (local?) source & manufacturer for your RAM, and stick with them, and make sure they'll take back bad RAM. It's rather pathetic how much bad RAM I see on this list. I would think that RAM manufacturers would hold themselves to higher standards, especially with the proliferation of OSs with the memory usage sophistication like FreeBSD. Doug White | University of Oregon Internet: dwhite@resnet.uoregon.edu | Residence Networking Assistant http://gladstone.uoregon.edu/~dwhite | Computer Science Major