Tim wrote:
Actually, I'd go along with the last argument (improve the cooling). If
your box is overheating, whether it's due to strange conditions or not,
the fact that it *can* overheat is the important issue.
Therefore there's a chance that it can overheat during normal operating
conditions, if one of your normal operating conditions makes strong use
of the CPU. So you DO want to improve your cooling.
All that is presuming that it really is overheating, and not just that
the over-temperature alarm, itself, is at fault.
I give up. Linux is a religion. Linus is the Pope. No one can
question it. Heretics are vilified and run out of town on a rail.
Here we have a chance to take 5 minutes to run top, and see
what the CPU utilization is. It would literally take five
minutes.
I am 99.44% sure that nothing would turn up. But what would
it cost?
It costs actually considering the possibility that Linux might
have one line of code which is not perfect.
That's a priori impossible. Because the Pope is never wrong,
and the Holy Religion cannot be questioned. I am anathema.
So, an opportunity possibly to improve Linux passes us by
because we can't take the time to run top once.
I'm reminded of the famous line supposedly spoken by a german
commander when the invasion in Normandy began, and he couldn't
inform German High Command: "Wir werden den Krieg verloren,
weil der Fuehrer einige Schlaftabletten genommen hat, und nicht
zu stoeren ist."
It's futile to suggest actually to collect any data on Linux behavior
if there is any threat it might reveal a wart on its nose, because
the suggestion will be rejected out of hand.
Mike
--
p="p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
This message made from 100% recycled bits.
You have found the bank of Larn.
I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you.
I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that!
