Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 11:14:46 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 11:14:28 -0500 Received: from 217-126-161-163.uc.nombres.ttd.es ([217.126.161.163]:640 "EHLO DervishD.viadomus.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 11:14:14 -0500 To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, raul@viadomus.com, znmeb@aracnet.com Subject: RE: Out of Memory at 20GB of free memory ?? Message-Id: Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 17:26:25 +0100 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Ra=FAl?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?N=FA=F1ez?= de Arenas Coronado Reply-To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Ra=FAl?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?N=FA=F1ez?= de Arenas Coronado X-Mailer: DervishD TWiSTiNG Mailer Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Edward :) >> > total: used: free: shared: buffers: cached: >> >Mem: 33815060480 13490249728 20324810752 0 15745024 13089452032 >> This leads to a suggestion... How about aligning the top >> indication with the numbers below (or even better, putting them in >> different lines ;))) >My impression was that the top few lines of /proc/meminfo were being >"phased out" in favor of the one-entry-per-line-in kB numbers below. I think so, indeed, but anyway an 'amendment' is harmless, isnt'it? >perhaps what needs to change is not /proc/meminfo but "top". This is true, too ;) Ra?l - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/