> Clive at Rational wrote: > > Hello, > > > > I have an unreliable FC2 / 2.6.5 kernel > machine. I > > am running it as a file server. From time to time > the > > machine "hangs" or puts out lots of messages of > the > > form > > > > [snip] > > I also run FC2, so as you can see, I understand your > reluctance. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." But > you appear to be "broke". > > What is your reluctance to use up2date? I'm running > 2.6.10-1.771_FC2 so you are really behind, even as > FC2. > If a new kernel doesn't help, the way up2date works > it's easy to roll back (at least with GRUB). > > Mike > -- Thanks for the response. The problem is "bigger" than I described in that I have tried various levels of FC2 (latest kernels) and FC3 up to 2.6.10 kernel. Of those the most stable (longest time between "crashes" = 1 day) is the FC2 2.6.5 kernel. However, today the crashing seems to occur within 30 miunutes. Maybe it is a hardware problem but I have no idea how to isolate. I feel I really need to capture those messages that appear on the console. Worse than the problems I experience now at 2.6.5, the machine experiences lock-ups within minutes of starting an X-session either locally or through VNC. Hence I run in command-line, level 3. My "best" stability has been found by regressing all the way to FC2 2.6.5 and run-level 3 (no X-sessions). I am trying to run the machine in its "simplest" form to try and isolate the problem as Gnome / X / video driver / application / hardware / whatever / whatever. I seem to be no closer to isolating the problem and it is really frustrating. I made the change to syslog.conf to write the kernel messages to /var/log/CRL-console.log. This works - in that kernel messages are being written to the file - but when the crash / kernel-panic(?) occurs, the error messages I am interested in still appear on the console. So I am no closer to trapping these error messages so I can post them and and at least try to solve the first problem - why is the machine so unstable even though it is running in a "reduced" state? I really want to run X as I find it easier to administer the system using those type of tools - I just don't have the knowledge to operate a machine through the command-line. But for now I just want to get a stable , simple file server, then move on. If I could "prove" it is the hardware I'll trash the machine. This is maddening. Thanks Clive
