jason at tommyk.com
Tue Mar 25 06:39:37 PST 2003
Frank Gruellich wrote:
> On 24 Mar 2003, Dagmar d'Surreal wrote:
>>I'll go a bit farther and say that kmod _completely and entirely_
>>obsolesces the use of kerneld. The big sneaky thing about it is that
>>it's so dratted transparent it's often hard to tell it's active.
> You are very right. But three reasons for kerneld:
> 1. The tech factor: AFAIK kmod never unloads modules. That would be done
> by any cron facility. So, if you omit cron, kerneld would be your choice.
Untrue. The kernel autocleans modules not in use.
> 2. The fun factor: kmod can't load a funny screen saver program but the
? What does kernel modules have to do w/ a screen saver?
> 3. The didactic factor: I really like configuring strange programs ;-)
To each their own :)
Unsubscribe: send email to listar at linuxfromscratch.org
and put 'unsubscribe blfs-support' in the subject header of the message
More information about the blfs-support