|
 |
On Tue, 05 Oct 1999 07:12:50 -0400, Glen Berry wrote:
>On Tue, 05 Oct 1999 01:29:41 -0700, Ken <tyl### [at] pacbell net> wrote:
>>Got bad ram at that address ?
>
>I hope not, but I'm not sure how to rule that out. Like I said, my
>other software seems to be working okay, so I'm hoping that it isn't
>something like bad RAM.
Not likely. It's not an address that would normally be used for anything.
It's being accessed because there's a bad pointer somewhere. In any case,
virtual memory means never being able to relate an address to a physical
piece of memory, so even if it was bad RAM it wouldn't always map to the
same address.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
