Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 10:03:42 +0000 (GMT) From: Mark Powell <M.S.Powell@salford.ac.uk> To: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Weird kernel problem Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0102071001190.55653-100000@plato.salford.ac.uk> In-Reply-To: <20010207015642.A23061@mollari.cthul.hu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 7 Feb 2001, Kris Kennaway wrote: > On Wed, Feb 07, 2001 at 09:48:26AM +0000, Mark Powell wrote: > > Hi, > > Had a machine on which top hasn't been working for a while. I thought > > maybe I'd not rebuilt the system properly, so I brought it and another > > machine up to date with 4.2S yesterday. Did make world on both and rebuilt > > their kernels, both from the same config file. They should both be the > > same after that, right? > > Now both are rebooted top still fails with "top: nlist > > failed". Strangely, in memory the kernel is rather large: > > See the FAQ about this question. I thought I was aware of the usual cause of this problem; userland & kernel out of sync; but as I explained I've rebuilt the two systems and checked that both have the same kernel, same top command, same shared libraries. So it must be the boot loader then? Why would this make the kernel appear to take up so much memory on just the one system? Cheers. Mark Powell - UNIX System Administrator - The University of Salford Academic Information Services, Clifford Whitworth Building, Salford University, Manchester, M5 4WT, UK. Tel: +44 161 295 5936 Fax: +44 161 295 5888 www.pgp.com for PGP key To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0102071001190.55653-100000>