[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: 2 tmpfs filesystems mounted?



dev/hda8             7.4G  3.8G  3.2G  55% /
tmpfs                 252M     0  252M   0% /dev/shm
/dev/hda4             6.8G  1.6G  4.9G  24% /home2
/dev/hda3             5.3G  1.8G  3.3G  35% /data
/dev/hda5              24G   21G  2.9G  88% /mnt/d
/dev/hda6              24G   20G  3.6G  85% /mnt/e
tmpfs                 252M  3.8M  248M   2% /tmp
tmpfs                  10M  116K  9.9M   2% /dev
my computer mount three tmpfs;
is the useful of the /dev/shm???

2006/4/20, Adam Hardy <adam.ant@cyberspaceroad.com>:
> Florian Kulzer on 19/04/06 12:29, wrote:
> >>> why don't you post those messages and we can all pitch in... unless
> >>> you're worried that'll bring about an early demise? ;)
> >> I see stuff in syslog and in boot and yet I can't see the relevant stuff
> >> which I see scroll past when I'm booting.
> >>
> >> There's no 'boot' facility/priority in the syslog.conf, so how is it
> >> controlled?
> >
> > You can set
> >
> > BOOTLOGD_ENABLE=Yes
> >
> > in /etc/default/bootlogd. This should catch all output on the console
> > during most of the boot process and put it in a log file in /var/log.
> > For the earliest part of the boot process you would need to set up
> > logging to a serial console and use a second computer to record that.
> > However, sometimes the ScrollLock key is good enough to allow you to
> > read the stuff that is scrolling by.
>
> Scroll lock works? I never thought I could stop Linux with the scroll
> lock key.
>
> My /var/logs/boot file contains a fair amount of stuff, but with scroll
> lock I should be able to pick up the most interesting stuff.
>
> OK just did that and now that I can actually read it, it's all fine,
> there's no problem at all.
>
> I can see where the bootlogger kicks in as well.
>
> Thanks anyway,
>
> Adam
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
>
>

Reply to: