On Wednesday 23 April 2003 03:54 pm, Adrian wrote: > EEK, Hi All > i'm not quite sure what to make of this but has anyone seen anything > similar, as its a bit of a worry. I have enclosed the following from > 5.0-Release after having the same prob with 5.0-CURRENT-20030418 prior to > this the server was running 4.5-Release-p2 and it was ok. I get the 1Jan70 process ages as well. While a bit unusual, I don't believe it's problematic; all the processes with that date are kernel-related or low-level system processes. 1Jan70 just means their start dates are zero. This strikes me as a bug, yes, but probably not fatal. :-) -Cliff L. BiffleReceived on Wed Apr 23 2003 - 14:43:07 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:37:04 UTC