Linux - General This Linux forum is for general Linux questions and discussion.
If it is Linux Related and doesn't seem to fit in any other forum then this is the place. |
Notices |
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
Are you new to LinuxQuestions.org? Visit the following links:
Site Howto |
Site FAQ |
Sitemap |
Register Now
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
|
 |
07-19-2000, 12:27 PM
|
#1
|
Member
Registered: Jun 2000
Location: SUNY Buffalo
Posts: 79
Rep:
|
In my machine of have 128mb of RAM in the configuration of one 128mb DIMM. When my computer boots the BIOS does a full check of all 128mb w/ out reporting any problems. Yet in linux, this is the result of my top.
Mem: 64136K av, 62552K used, 1584K free, 52152K shrd
Should that not say 128,000K av? not 64,000K? I even added append "mem=128M" to my lilo.conf, but to no avail.... is there really a problem here or is this just how top reports my memory?
|
|
|
07-19-2000, 04:33 PM
|
#2
|
root 
Registered: Jun 2000
Distribution: Debian, Red Hat, Slackware, Fedora, Ubuntu
Posts: 13,625
|
Top should display the whole amount (probably something like 127800K). The append in lilo.conf should take care of it, although the syntax is append="mem=128M" (notice the two equals signs). If that does not work let us know.
|
|
|
07-19-2000, 09:49 PM
|
#3
|
Member
Registered: Jun 2000
Location: SUNY Buffalo
Posts: 79
Original Poster
Rep:
|
linux and it's issues w/ RAM
Still no luck w/ that modified lilo.conf. Now I'm putting the append="mem=128M" in the first "section" of lilo where the timeout and the default OS to load are declared. Does it belong in the section where I'm actually configuring which kernels to boot and how to boot them? Any other ideas?
|
|
|
07-19-2000, 09:57 PM
|
#4
|
Member
Registered: Jun 2000
Location: SUNY Buffalo
Posts: 79
Original Poster
Rep:
|
another thought on RAM
also.... do I have to actually RUN lilo again after adding the append and before rebooting to test it?
|
|
|
07-19-2000, 10:15 PM
|
#5
|
root 
Registered: Jun 2000
Distribution: Debian, Red Hat, Slackware, Fedora, Ubuntu
Posts: 13,625
|
Changes made to lilo.conf will NOT take effect until after you run /sbin/lilo as root. I usually put the append= line in between the label and the read-only line, but anywhere in the image section is probably fine.
|
|
|
07-19-2000, 10:16 PM
|
#6
|
Member
Registered: Jun 2000
Location: SUNY Buffalo
Posts: 79
Original Poster
Rep:
|
woohoo!
Welp, problem solved. It would seem as if one has to add the append="mem=128M" to the VERY first line of lilo.conf, and then run 'lilo'. Doing this made linux recognize all 128mb of my RAM, and made me a happy guy (after rebooting of course) . =)
|
|
|
07-20-2000, 12:15 PM
|
#7
|
root 
Registered: Jun 2000
Distribution: Debian, Red Hat, Slackware, Fedora, Ubuntu
Posts: 13,625
|
Glad to hear that the problem is fixed. Does the machine seem any faster?
|
|
|
07-20-2000, 04:25 PM
|
#8
|
Member
Registered: Jun 2000
Location: SUNY Buffalo
Posts: 79
Original Poster
Rep:
|
faster
Yep, I can see a markéd difference, mostly when loading up Netscape or doing stuff in Gimp. Doesn't seem to boot any faster though.
|
|
|
10-13-2000, 12:16 PM
|
#9
|
LQ Newbie
Registered: Oct 2000
Location: CT, USA
Distribution: Zenwalk
Posts: 16
Rep:
|
I had the same problem with Mandrake only seeing 64M, once I fixed it and got it to read my whole 256M all I can say is WOW!!!!! Very fast.
|
|
|
03-26-2001, 03:08 AM
|
#10
|
LQ Newbie
Registered: Mar 2001
Location: Roland, Oklahoma
Distribution: Fedora Core 4 (Stentz)
Posts: 3
Rep:
|
Thanks!
I've been having the same problem with Slackware Kernel 1.3.30 and was looking for a way to fix it.. even posted the question elsewhere on this board.. glad I kept reading..
SummerWolfe
root@computerkeys (Not on net yet)
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:44 PM.
|
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.
|
Latest Threads
LQ News
|
|