zarniwhoop at ntlworld.com
Wed May 16 06:37:07 PDT 2007
On Wed, May 16, 2007 at 08:08:42AM -0400, Robert Connolly wrote:
> I have two guesses. Both of these drives are sata, and use the same
> controller. Perhaps the controller is damaged. The second guess is
> linux-184.108.40.206, because these problems began shortly after upgrading the
> kernel to this version from 220.127.116.11.
> Have any of you ever had similar issues?
Not exactly a similar issue, but then I don't use encryption. On
my previous "server" everything in /home was backed up several times
a day (including source tarballs) using rsync to a separate disk
(with a rolling set of x copies). One day, a tarball for gcc became
corrupt. Searching through the backups of that tarball, they all
seemed to be corrupt too. In that case I downloaded it again, but
eventually I powered the box down, ran memtest86+, and sure enough
one of the memory sticks had gone bad.
You said your bios tests the memory, but I tend to have a low
opinion of bios code (it's probably better than I could write, but
that doesn't mean it's any good ;). Try memtest86+.
das eine Mal als Tragödie, das andere Mal als Farce
More information about the lfs-chat