"Davo" u33430@redacted.invalid writes:
My Mac Mini, version OSX 10.4.9, refuses to shut down correctly. The monitor displays a grey screen telling me I must switch off the Mini using the power button.
This sounds like a kernel panic. Did you read the screen in detail? Try running DiskWarrior and/or TechTool Pro and scan the disk. One of the many possible causes of kernel panics (and a common one) is minor to moderate disk corruption.
I humbly obey but, when I switch on again, an annoying message tells me that the damned thing shut down unexpectedly. A minor and trivial niggle, I'm sure, but is there anything I can do to sort it?
Fix the underlying problem that is causing the kernel panic. Start with the disk repair programs mentioned above. Let us know what happens after that....
-Stephen
In article f037v11146@redacted.invalid, Stephen Adams adamst@redacted.invalid wrote:
My Mac Mini, version OSX 10.4.9, refuses to shut down correctly. The monitor displays a grey screen telling me I must switch off the Mini using the power button.
This sounds like a kernel panic. Did you read the screen in detail? Try running DiskWarrior and/or TechTool Pro and scan the disk. One of the many possible causes of kernel panics (and a common one) is minor to moderate disk corruption.
I humbly obey but, when I switch on again, an annoying message tells me that the damned thing shut down unexpectedly. A minor and trivial niggle, I'm sure, but is there anything I can do to sort it?
Fix the underlying problem that is causing the kernel panic. Start with the disk repair programs mentioned above. Let us know what happens after that....
Why? Kernel panics seem to be caused by poor drivers often in connection with sleep. Ever since I turned computer sleep off (but keep screen sleep), I haven't had any.
Hans Aberg
In article haberg-1704072208470001@redacted.invalid, Hans Aberg haberg@redacted.invalid wrote:
In article f037v11146@redacted.invalid, Stephen Adams adamst@redacted.invalid wrote:
My Mac Mini, version OSX 10.4.9, refuses to shut down correctly. The monitor displays a grey screen telling me I must switch off the Mini using the power button.
This sounds like a kernel panic. Did you read the screen in detail? Try running DiskWarrior and/or TechTool Pro and scan the disk. One of the many possible causes of kernel panics (and a common one) is minor to moderate disk corruption.
I humbly obey but, when I switch on again, an annoying message tells me that the damned thing shut down unexpectedly. A minor and trivial niggle, I'm sure, but is there anything I can do to sort it?
Fix the underlying problem that is causing the kernel panic. Start with the disk repair programs mentioned above. Let us know what happens after that....
Why? Kernel panics seem to be caused by poor drivers often in connection with sleep. Ever since I turned computer sleep off (but keep screen sleep), I haven't had any.
Your experience (in many things) is not typical.
In article <170420071424331204%dave@redacted.invalid_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca>, dave@redacted.invalid_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca wrote:
Fix the underlying problem that is causing the kernel panic. Start with
the disk repair programs mentioned above. Let us know what happens after that....
Why? Kernel panics seem to be caused by poor drivers often in connection with sleep. Ever since I turned computer sleep off (but keep screen sleep), I haven't had any.
Your experience (in many things) is not typical.
So what do you mean by that relative the technical issue at hand?
Hans Aberg
On 2007-04-17 15:37:53 -0500, haberg@redacted.invalid (Hans Aberg) said:
In article <170420071424331204%dave@redacted.invalid_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca>, dave@redacted.invalid_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca wrote:
Fix the underlying problem that is causing the kernel panic. Start with
the disk repair programs mentioned above. Let us know what happens after that....
Why? Kernel panics seem to be caused by poor drivers often in connection with sleep. Ever since I turned computer sleep off (but keep screen sleep), I haven't had any.
Your experience (in many things) is not typical.
So what do you mean by that relative the technical issue at hand?
He means experience shows that the OP's issue is likely not caused by a bug in sleep functionality.
In article haberg-1704072237530001@redacted.invalid, Hans Aberg haberg@redacted.invalid wrote:
In article <170420071424331204%dave@redacted.invalid_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca>, dave@redacted.invalid_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca wrote:
Fix the underlying problem that is causing the kernel panic. Start with
the disk repair programs mentioned above. Let us know what happens after that....
Why? Kernel panics seem to be caused by poor drivers often in connection with sleep. Ever since I turned computer sleep off (but keep screen sleep), I haven't had any.
Your experience (in many things) is not typical.
So what do you mean by that relative the technical issue at hand?
That your statement may be relevant to your own experience but is unlikely to have anything to do with the issue at hand, especially considering the OP never mentioned sleep as part of the problem, but rather shutdown. I'd be interested in seeing any technotes that describe kernel panics as a result of bad drivers and sleep, however.
To Davo:
What peripherals do you have connected? If you unplug them and start up, do you get the panic?
As well, see http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=303656 although it seems to be an obscure problem.
Contrary to what Hans says, kernel panics are often hardware related, as you will see if you go to apple.com, click "Support" and enter "kernel panic" in the search field.
Check your peripheral devices (mouse, keyboard, etc). Run disk diagnostics. Also consider testing the RAM and/or cracking the Mini open (or having someone do it) and reseating the RAM.
In article <170420071454007208%dave@redacted.invalid_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca>, dave@redacted.invalid_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca wrote:
So what do you mean by that relative the technical issue at hand?
That your statement may be relevant to your own experience but is unlikely to have anything to do with the issue at hand, especially considering the OP never mentioned sleep as part of the problem, but rather shutdown. I'd be interested in seeing any technotes that describe kernel panics as a result of bad drivers and sleep, however.
So what do you think a kernel panic is?
What peripherals do you have connected? If you unplug them and start up, do you get the panic?
As well, see http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=303656 although it seems to be an obscure problem.
Contrary to what Hans says, kernel panics are often hardware related, as you will see if you go to apple.com, click "Support" and enter "kernel panic" in the search field.
Contrary to what I said???
Check your peripheral devices (mouse, keyboard, etc). Run disk diagnostics. Also consider testing the RAM and/or cracking the Mini open (or having someone do it) and reseating the RAM.
How about reinstalling the OS?
Hans Aberg
In article 2007041715411026553-jollyroger@redacted.invalid, Jolly Roger jollyroger@redacted.invalid wrote:
Fix the underlying problem that is causing the kernel panic. Start with
the disk repair programs mentioned above. Let us know what happens after that....
Why? Kernel panics seem to be caused by poor drivers often in connection with sleep. Ever since I turned computer sleep off (but keep screen sleep), I haven't had any.
Your experience (in many things) is not typical.
So what do you mean by that relative the technical issue at hand?
He means experience shows that the OP's issue is likely not caused by a bug in sleep functionality.
Mind reader, please explain this further what he means, what experience?
Hans Aberg
In article haberg-1704072303140001@redacted.invalid, Hans Aberg haberg@redacted.invalid wrote:
In article <170420071454007208%dave@redacted.invalid_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca>, dave@redacted.invalid_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca wrote:
So what do you mean by that relative the technical issue at hand?
That your statement may be relevant to your own experience but is unlikely to have anything to do with the issue at hand, especially considering the OP never mentioned sleep as part of the problem, but rather shutdown. I'd be interested in seeing any technotes that describe kernel panics as a result of bad drivers and sleep, however.
So what do you think a kernel panic is?
An error that the OS cannot recover from, is the simplest explanation.
What peripherals do you have connected? If you unplug them and start up, do you get the panic?
As well, see http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=303656 although it seems to be an obscure problem.
Contrary to what Hans says, kernel panics are often hardware related, as you will see if you go to apple.com, click "Support" and enter "kernel panic" in the search field.
Contrary to what I said???
You said "Kernel panics seem to be caused by poor drivers often in connection with sleep." Contrary to that statement, kernel panics are often hardware related. If you had said "Kernel panics may be caused by poor drivers in connection with sleep." I would not have used the word "contrary" but would still have pointed out that sleep was not mentioned in the original post. Shutdown was.
Check your peripheral devices (mouse, keyboard, etc). Run disk diagnostics. Also consider testing the RAM and/or cracking the Mini open (or having someone do it) and reseating the RAM.
How about reinstalling the OS?
It's an option. But if the OP has hardware that's causing the kernel panics it's unlikely to help.
On 2007-04-17 16:05:31 -0500, haberg@redacted.invalid (Hans Aberg) said:
In article 2007041715411026553-jollyroger@redacted.invalid, Jolly Roger jollyroger@redacted.invalid wrote:
Fix the underlying problem that is causing the kernel panic. Start with
the disk repair programs mentioned above. Let us know what happens after that....
Why? Kernel panics seem to be caused by poor drivers often in connection with sleep. Ever since I turned computer sleep off (but keep screen sleep), I haven't had any.
Your experience (in many things) is not typical.
So what do you mean by that relative the technical issue at hand?
He means experience shows that the OP's issue is likely not caused by a bug in sleep functionality.
Mind reader, please explain this further what he means, what experience?
I think I'll let him speak for himself.
In article <170420071510065164%dave@redacted.invalid_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca>, dave@redacted.invalid_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca wrote:
So what do you think a kernel panic is?
An error that the OS cannot recover from, is the simplest explanation.
No, it is an error that the UNIX kernel cannot recover from, that it, code it cannot interpret. The kernel runs processes (and does not know anything about the OS on top of it), but if a process has code the kernel cannot handle, the latter takes it down. So the kernel must be nearly always be fed some code external to normal processes for a kernel panic to happen, because in normal running this should happen very rarely.
So there are not many ways the UNIX kernel can be fed external code, but when it goes to sleep, then in fact the whole kernel is going comatose, and it was not designed for being able to handle that. So tweaking the UNIX kernel to get it right is very difficult.
Now, as it happens, I had some communications with APDA about ways to get around this problem, and they got back, thanking for this suggestion they said they would investigate. So this is my experience that makes me think I am right, and probably not the typical one. :-)
What peripherals do you have connected? If you unplug them and start up, do you get the panic?
As well, see http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=303656 although it seems to be an obscure problem.
Contrary to what Hans says, kernel panics are often hardware related, as you will see if you go to apple.com, click "Support" and enter "kernel panic" in the search field.
Contrary to what I said???
You said "Kernel panics seem to be caused by poor drivers often in connection with sleep." Contrary to that statement, kernel panics are often hardware related. If you had said "Kernel panics may be caused by poor drivers in connection with sleep." I would not have used the word "contrary" but would still have pointed out that sleep was not mentioned in the original post. Shutdown was.
The hardware needs drivers to communicate with the kernel. If that just fails in the realm of normal processes, the kernel panic should not happen.
Check your peripheral devices (mouse, keyboard, etc). Run disk diagnostics. Also consider testing the RAM and/or cracking the Mini open (or having someone do it) and reseating the RAM.
How about reinstalling the OS?
It's an option. But if the OP has hardware that's causing the kernel panics it's unlikely to help.
This last comment is though true. Therefore, one can try to turning computer sleep, and see if that helps.
If computer sleep is off, then kernel panics can still happen, because the kernel is not 100% sure to not being able to handle faulty processes. In fact, I was able to bomb a Sun UNIX computer in the 1990s only doing some Netscape surfing. But this is should happen very rarely.
Hans Aberg
In article 2007041716332779373-jollyroger@redacted.invalid, Jolly Roger jollyroger@redacted.invalid wrote:
Mind reader, please explain this further what he means, what experience?
I think I'll let him speak for himself.
Good! :-)
Hans Aberg
On 2007-04-17 16:40:38 -0500, haberg@redacted.invalid (Hans Aberg) said:
In article 2007041716332779373-jollyroger@redacted.invalid, Jolly Roger jollyroger@redacted.invalid wrote:
Mind reader, please explain this further what he means, what experience?
I think I'll let him speak for himself.
Good! :-)
Well the only reason I said anything is you seem to be on some sort of war path with Dave regarding kernel panics. And I have personal experience that shows kernel panics often have nothing at all to do with misbehaving drivers.
Jolly Roger jollyroger@redacted.invalid wrote:
Well the only reason I said anything is you seem to be on some sort of war path with Dave regarding kernel panics. And I have personal experience that shows kernel panics often have nothing at all to do with misbehaving drivers.
Also, the gist of Dave's contention Hans is that the OP's problem has nothing to do with sleep issues.
On 2007-04-17 16:55:01 -0500, mikePOST@redacted.invalid (Mike Rosenberg) said:
Jolly Roger jollyroger@redacted.invalid wrote:
Well the only reason I said anything is you seem to be on some sort of war path with Dave regarding kernel panics. And I have personal experience that shows kernel panics often have nothing at all to do with misbehaving drivers.
Also, the gist of Dave's contention Hans is that the OP's problem has nothing to do with sleep issues.
I don't get what Hans is so worked up about. Yes, kernel panics can happen as a result of misbehaving drivers, but anyone saying there are absolutely no other causes isn't living in reality.
Jolly Roger jollyroger@redacted.invalid wrote:
I don't get what Hans is so worked up about. Yes, kernel panics can happen as a result of misbehaving drivers, but anyone saying there are absolutely no other causes isn't living in reality.
Oh, that's just Hans being Hans. I've learned from experience he's never wrong. Occasionally contrafactual, but never wrong. ;-)
In article 2007041716453862721-jollyroger@redacted.invalid, Jolly Roger jollyroger@redacted.invalid wrote:
Mind reader, please explain this further what he means, what experience?
I think I'll let him speak for himself.
Good! :-)
Well the only reason I said anything is you seem to be on some sort of war path with Dave regarding kernel panics.
So you mean that if I responds to a personal attack by asking how that relates to the technical issue at hand, then I am going out at war??? Well, well, well.
And I have personal experience that shows kernel panics often have nothing at all to do with misbehaving drivers.
So should perhaps explain how you derive that experience. I mean, all one get to know is that the kernel got some code it cannot handle.
Hans Aberg
In article 1hwq716.o0vqii6o546xN%mikePOST@redacted.invalid, mikePOST@redacted.invalid (Mike Rosenberg) wrote:
Also, the gist of Dave's contention Hans...
Oh this is difficult English.
... is that the OP's problem has nothing to do with sleep issues.
And how was this conclusion derived? The OP just said something about a green box saying the computer must be shut down by hand.
Hans Aberg
In article 2007041716594892301-jollyroger@redacted.invalid, Jolly Roger jollyroger@redacted.invalid wrote:
Also, the gist of Dave's contention Hans is that the OP's problem has nothing to do with sleep issues.
I don't get what Hans is so worked up about.
Am I worked up, when I calmly try to get you to explain what you mean. Gosh!
Yes, kernel panics can happen as a result of misbehaving drivers, but anyone saying there are absolutely no other causes isn't living in reality.
Your suggestion look like coming from Mac OS 9. Yes, back then, those were right. But it is very difficult to bomb a UNIX kernel via ordinarily running processes. UNIX computers bomb very rarely, and therefore Internet is pretty much being run by them. Still Mac OS X can bomb via "kernel panics" much more often that other UNIX computers. Why is that so? There must something that causes it.
Hans Aberg
Mike "Shirley" Rosenberg wrote:
Oh, that's just Hans being Hans. I've learned from experience he's never wrong. Occasionally contrafactual, but never wrong. ;-)
Shirley!
One thing is for sure, that Mike does never admit his mistakes of significance, just look at the thread "Disk repair fails". Boy, did he really stupid remarks there. But did he post admitting that he was a dumbass there. Nope!
By Shirley!
Hans Aberg
On 2007-04-17 17:24:19 -0500, haberg@redacted.invalid (Hans Aberg) said:
One thing is for sure, that Mike does never admit his mistakes of significance
Pot, meet Kettle.
In article haberg-1804070012020001@redacted.invalid, Hans Aberg haberg@redacted.invalid wrote:
In article 1hwq716.o0vqii6o546xN%mikePOST@redacted.invalid, mikePOST@redacted.invalid (Mike Rosenberg) wrote:
Also, the gist of Dave's contention Hans...
Oh this is difficult English.
... is that the OP's problem has nothing to do with sleep issues.
And how was this conclusion derived? The OP just said something about a green box saying the computer must be shut down by hand.
Go back and read the original message. The OP is getting the panic AT SHUTDOWN and not waking from sleep. The OP never mentions sleep.
On 2007-04-17 17:17:09 -0500, haberg@redacted.invalid (Hans Aberg) said:
In article 2007041716594892301-jollyroger@redacted.invalid, Jolly Roger jollyroger@redacted.invalid wrote:
Also, the gist of Dave's contention Hans is that the OP's problem has nothing to do with sleep issues.
I don't get what Hans is so worked up about.
Am I worked up, when I calmly try to get you to explain what you mean. Gosh!
I don't know. Are you? You seem to be.
Yes, kernel panics can happen as a result of misbehaving drivers, but anyone saying there are absolutely no other causes isn't living in reality.
Your suggestion look like coming from Mac OS 9.
Say what?
Your English look like coming from not America.
Yes, back then, those were right.
Back in Mac OS 9 one could lock up the kernel? Sure.
Yet even today in Mac OS X with XNU it's possible to panic through means other than sleep issues.
But it is very difficult to bomb a UNIX kernel via ordinarily running processes.
Yet still, it happens. Go figure.
Still Mac OS X can bomb via "kernel panics" much more often that other UNIX computers. Why is that so? There must something that causes it.
According to you, it's all due to sleep bugs.
On 2007-04-17 17:07:44 -0500, haberg@redacted.invalid (Hans Aberg) said:
In article 2007041716453862721-jollyroger@redacted.invalid, Jolly Roger jollyroger@redacted.invalid wrote:
Mind reader, please explain this further what he means, what experience?
I think I'll let him speak for himself.
Good! :-)
Well the only reason I said anything is you seem to be on some sort of war path with Dave regarding kernel panics.
So you mean that if I responds to a personal attack by asking how that relates to the technical issue at hand, then I am going out at war??? Well, well, well.
Nobody has attacked your person here. It's you who seems to be on the offensive position here. In fact, nobody was talking to you at all until you went on the offensive with Dave.
And I have personal experience that shows kernel panics often have nothing at all to do with misbehaving drivers.
So should perhaps explain how you derive that experience. I mean, all one get to know is that the kernel got some code it cannot handle.
I've had plenty of kernel panics that had nothing at all to do with sleep.
In article <170420071635201468%dave@redacted.invalid_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca>, dave@redacted.invalid_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca wrote:
And how was this conclusion derived? The OP just said something about a green box saying the computer must be shut down by hand.
Go back and read the original message. The OP is getting the panic AT SHUTDOWN and not waking from sleep. The OP never mentions sleep.
What happens is that some code is becoming corrupted somewhere, and the kernel at a later point experiences it, causing the kernel panic. So there is no close connection there. It makes it very difficult to debug.
Hans Aberg
In article haberg-1804070007440001@redacted.invalid, Hans Aberg haberg@redacted.invalid wrote:
In article 2007041716453862721-jollyroger@redacted.invalid, Jolly Roger jollyroger@redacted.invalid wrote:
Mind reader, please explain this further what he means, what experience?
I think I'll let him speak for himself.
Good! :-)
Well the only reason I said anything is you seem to be on some sort of war path with Dave regarding kernel panics.
So you mean that if I responds to a personal attack by asking how that relates to the technical issue at hand, then I am going out at war??? Well, well, well.
What "personal attack" are you referring to? There has been no personal attack in this thread.
If you want one, however, it can be arranged.
And I have personal experience that shows kernel panics often have nothing at all to do with misbehaving drivers.
So should perhaps explain how you derive that experience. I mean, all one get to know is that the kernel got some code it cannot handle.
Hans Aberg
Hans Aberg haberg@redacted.invalid wrote:
One thing is for sure, that Mike does never admit his mistakes of significance...
Excuse me? I have no problem saying I'm wrong, and I have often posted to say I had made a mistake in a previous post.
just look at the thread "Disk repair fails". Boy, did he really stupid remarks there. But did he post admitting that he was a dumbass there. Nope!
Okay, I see the one and only post I made in the thread, in which I advised people it's prudent always act as if their drive may fail and to be sure to have a sensible backup in case of the worst. If you think that's stupid, well so be it, but perhaps you would care to explain why you think people should not do this.
In article haberg-1804070048370001@redacted.invalid, Hans Aberg haberg@redacted.invalid wrote:
In article <170420071635201468%dave@redacted.invalid_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca>, dave@redacted.invalid_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca wrote:
And how was this conclusion derived? The OP just said something about a green box saying the computer must be shut down by hand.
Go back and read the original message. The OP is getting the panic AT SHUTDOWN and not waking from sleep. The OP never mentions sleep.
What happens is that some code is becoming corrupted somewhere, and the kernel at a later point experiences it, causing the kernel panic. So there is no close connection there. It makes it very difficult to debug.
Ah. So the fact that you can't demonstrate a connection to the Mac sleeping is how you know it's there.
Gotcha.
My laptops have been put to sleep at least 10 times a week for years.
I do not experience kernel panics when shutting down or restarting.
I do not experience kernel panics at all.
Which, I suppose, somehow proves your hypothesis?
In article 2007041717393486158-jollyroger@redacted.invalid, Jolly Roger jollyroger@redacted.invalid wrote:
Your suggestion look like coming from Mac OS 9.
Say what?
Your English look like coming from not America.
Sounds like you should go to sci.lang.
Yet even today in Mac OS X with XNU it's possible to panic through means other than sleep issues.
Just tell why, if now the kernel looks at every instruction making sure it is correct, and if not, merely downs the process that owned it.
Still Mac OS X can bomb via "kernel panics" much more often that other UNIX computers. Why is that so? There must something that causes it.
According to you, it's all due to sleep bugs.
No, I am saying that with code proper in the from of processes, a UNIX cmoputer almost never bombs. It is only taken down for maintenance. This is not what we are speaking about in terms of
If you have kernel panics, it is easy to turn computer sleep off, to see if that helps it.
Hans Aberg
In article 2007041717423571084-jollyroger@redacted.invalid, Jolly Roger jollyroger@redacted.invalid wrote:
Nobody has attacked your person here. It's you who seems to be on the offensive position here. In fact, nobody was talking to you at all until you went on the offensive with Dave.
The guy I was replying was named Stephen. Didn't read the thread before replying?
And I have personal experience that shows kernel panics often have nothing at all to do with misbehaving drivers.
So should perhaps explain how you derive that experience. I mean, all one get to know is that the kernel got some code it cannot handle.
I've had plenty of kernel panics that had nothing at all to do with sleep.
You don't know what caused them.
Hans Aberg
In article <170420071649131459%dave@redacted.invalid_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca>, dave@redacted.invalid_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca wrote:
So you mean that if I responds to a personal attack by asking how that relates to the technical issue at hand, then I am going out at war??? Well, well, well.
What "personal attack" are you referring to? There has been no personal attack in this thread.
This
In article <170420071424331204%dave@redacted.invalid_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca>, dave@redacted.invalid_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca wrote:
Your experience (in many things) is not typical.
If you want one, however, it can be arranged.
So it is so much a part of yourself, you are not aware of it.
Hans Aberg
Hans Aberg haberg@redacted.invalid wrote:
Also, the gist of Dave's contention Hans...
Oh this is difficult English.
I didn't read what I had written carefully before posting and missed seeing that I had left out "with." That should have been "Also, the gist of Dave's contention with Hans..."
... is that the OP's problem has nothing to do with sleep issues.
And how was this conclusion derived? The OP just said something about a green box saying the computer must be shut down by hand.
Let's see, there's the subject line, which is "Can't shutdown. Won't shutdown." Then there's his description of the problem, which reads "My Mac Mini, version OSX 10.4.9, refuses to shut down correctly." He has a problem trying to shut down his mini." To answer your question, I derived that conclusion by reading what he had written. How did you derive the conclusion that sleep is the problem?
In article haberg-1804070105250001@redacted.invalid, Hans Aberg haberg@redacted.invalid wrote:
In article <170420071649131459%dave@redacted.invalid_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca>, dave@redacted.invalid_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca wrote:
So you mean that if I responds to a personal attack by asking how that relates to the technical issue at hand, then I am going out at war??? Well, well, well.
What "personal attack" are you referring to? There has been no personal attack in this thread.
This
In article <170420071424331204%dave@redacted.invalid_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca>, dave@redacted.invalid_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca wrote:
Your experience (in many things) is not typical.
That is a demonstrable fact, not an attack.
Hans Aberg haberg@redacted.invalid wrote:
This
In article <170420071424331204%dave@redacted.invalid_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca>, dave@redacted.invalid_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca wrote:
Your experience (in many things) is not typical.
You call that a personal attack? One a scale of 1 to 10, that's a 1.5 at best. Would you like to see what a 5 is like? (That's about as high as I think you should risk going for now.)
In article 1hwq9f9.16id17b16ltrgpN%mikePOST@redacted.invalid, mikePOST@redacted.invalid (Mike Rosenberg) wrote:
One thing is for sure, that Mike does never admit his mistakes of significance...
Excuse me? I have no problem saying I'm wrong, and I have often posted to say I had made a mistake in a previous post.
The point is: get on the facts, and d not waste time on who is the culprit, that is just how technical lists work. And it is a too frequent phenomenon that those seeks someone to blame, were the ones who did it - I am not blaming you for it, but it just makes the practice bad. So let's get on with the technical issues, please!
just look at the thread "Disk repair fails". Boy, did he really stupid remarks there. But did he post admitting that he was a dumbass there. Nope!
Okay, I see the one and only post I made in the thread, in which I advised people it's prudent always act as if their drive may fail and to be sure to have a sensible backup in case of the worst. If you think that's stupid, well so be it, but perhaps you would care to explain why you think people should not do this.
I do not recall the issue anymore: see the link to Apple support I posted in that thread.
Hans Aberg
In article <170420071656317729%dave@redacted.invalid_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca>, dave@redacted.invalid_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca wrote:
And how was this conclusion derived? The OP just said something about a green box saying the computer must be shut down by hand.
Go back and read the original message. The OP is getting the panic AT SHUTDOWN and not waking from sleep. The OP never mentions sleep.
What happens is that some code is becoming corrupted somewhere, and the kernel at a later point experiences it, causing the kernel panic. So there is no close connection there. It makes it very difficult to debug.
Ah. So the fact that you can't demonstrate a connection to the Mac sleeping is how you know it's there.
No. It was based on a number communications here, that reasoning about how the UNIX kernel and sleep works, and finally that suggestion to and response from Apple.
My laptops have been put to sleep at least 10 times a week for years.
I do not experience kernel panics when shutting down or restarting.
I do not experience kernel panics at all.
Which, I suppose, somehow proves your hypothesis?
If you have drivers that are well written and handshaking well with the kernel with respect to sleep, then you may not get any problems.
So my suggestion is that if you have problems with kernel panics, try to turn off sleep to see if that helps.
If you do not have problems, do whatever you like. But UNIX wasn't written to handle sleep, so therefore, I have it turned off. Do whatever you like.
Hans Aberg
In article 1hwqa4k.1h1nfeq8248l2N%mikePOST@redacted.invalid, mikePOST@redacted.invalid (Mike Rosenberg) wrote:
Also, the gist of Dave's contention Hans...
Oh this is difficult English.
I didn't read what I had written carefully before posting and missed seeing that I had left out "with." That should have been "Also, the gist of Dave's contention with Hans..."
Sorry, I thought it was a construction I should have been able to parse.
... is that the OP's problem has nothing to do with sleep issues.
And how was this conclusion derived? The OP just said something about a green box saying the computer must be shut down by hand.
Let's see, there's the subject line, which is "Can't shutdown. Won't shutdown." Then there's his description of the problem, which reads "My Mac Mini, version OSX 10.4.9, refuses to shut down correctly." He has a problem trying to shut down his mini." To answer your question, I derived that conclusion by reading what he had written. How did you derive the conclusion that sleep is the problem?
I am just discussing kernel panics in general, pointing out the sleep thing, giving the OP the chance to get back for further info at need.
Hans Aberg
In article <170420071708592609%dave@redacted.invalid_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca>, dave@redacted.invalid_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca wrote:
So you mean that if I responds to a personal attack by asking how that relates to the technical issue at hand, then I am going out at war??? Well, well, well.
What "personal attack" are you referring to? There has been no personal attack in this thread.
This
In article <170420071424331204%dave@redacted.invalid_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca>, dave@redacted.invalid_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca wrote:
Your experience (in many things) is not typical.
That is a demonstrable fact, not an attack.
Hardly, it does not bring the technical issue forward. Try to hang out at some moderated technical lists, to see if your stuff gets thorugh there.
Hans Aberg
In article 1hwqaiq.t16cd7aakuhgN%mikePOST@redacted.invalid, mikePOST@redacted.invalid (Mike Rosenberg) wrote:
Your experience (in many things) is not typical.
You call that a personal attack?
Now you are jumping into some others discussion, instead of kletting folks speak for themselves.
It it personal, not intended positive, and does not realte to the technical ssue at hand. So a personal attack it is.
One a scale of 1 to 10, that's a 1.5 at best.
Personal attacks are so frequent in this newsgroup, you don't notice it anymore.
Would you like to see what a 5 is like? (That's about as high as I think you should risk going for now.)
Please don't try me. Such stuff just don't entertain me, that is why I am not engaging in it, not really that I do not know about it.
Hans Aberg
I have to drop off here (among other things, handling some Apple bugreport communications).
Hans Aberg
In article haberg-1804070124530001@redacted.invalid, Hans Aberg haberg@redacted.invalid wrote:
In article <170420071708592609%dave@redacted.invalid_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca>, dave@redacted.invalid_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca wrote:
So you mean that if I responds to a personal attack by asking how that relates to the technical issue at hand, then I am going out at war??? Well, well, well.
What "personal attack" are you referring to? There has been no personal attack in this thread.
This
In article <170420071424331204%dave@redacted.invalid_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca>, dave@redacted.invalid_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca wrote:
Your experience (in many things) is not typical.
That is a demonstrable fact, not an attack.
Hardly, it does not bring the technical issue forward. Try to hang out at some moderated technical lists, to see if your stuff gets thorugh there.
I don't believe in censorship.
On 2007-04-17 17:58:32 -0500, haberg@redacted.invalid (Hans Aberg) said:
Yet even today in Mac OS X with XNU it's possible to panic through means other than sleep issues.
Just tell why, if now the kernel looks at every instruction making sure it is correct, and if not, merely downs the process that owned it.
The onus is on you to prove that the only way to panic a kernel is with sleep functionality.
On 2007-04-17 18:20:07 -0500, haberg@redacted.invalid (Hans Aberg) said:
UNIX wasn't written to handle sleep
Am I the only one who finds this statement somewhat amusing? : )
On 2007-04-17 18:02:48 -0500, haberg@redacted.invalid (Hans Aberg) said:
In article 2007041717423571084-jollyroger@redacted.invalid, Jolly Roger jollyroger@redacted.invalid wrote:
Nobody has attacked your person here. It's you who seems to be on the offensive position here. In fact, nobody was talking to you at all until you went on the offensive with Dave.
The guy I was replying was named Stephen. Didn't read the thread before replying?
And I have personal experience that shows kernel panics often have nothing at all to do with misbehaving drivers.
So should perhaps explain how you derive that experience. I mean, all one get to know is that the kernel got some code it cannot handle.
I've had plenty of kernel panics that had nothing at all to do with sleep.
You don't know what caused them.
Neither do you.
In article 70da05f89fb02@redacted.invalid, "Davo" u33430@redacted.invalid wrote:
My Mac Mini, version OSX 10.4.9, refuses to shut down correctly. The monitor displays a grey screen telling me I must switch off the Mini using the power button. I humbly obey but, when I switch on again, an annoying message tells me that the damned thing shut down unexpectedly. A minor and trivial niggle, I'm sure, but is there anything I can do to sort it?
You are experiencing a kernel panic. These indicate catastrophic failure of the running OS X kernel, and may be caused by hardware or software problems.
Some Minis are alleged to have been loaded with a corrupt disk image at Apple, and to have problems with kernel panics which can be solved simply by doing an "archive and install" from the discs that came with them. I would try that first. If you continue to experience problems, run the Apple Hardware Test that came with your computer to rule out defective hardware.