KernelD Program

Frank Gruellich frank at
Wed Mar 26 01:07:00 PST 2003


On 25 Mar 2003, Dagmar d'Surreal wrote:
> On Tue, 2003-03-25 at 03:39, 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.
> However, crond is already installed on everything that matters.

Read!  I said:  "if you omit cron".  There could be reasons to do so.  
(Would you use crond on a kiosk machine?)

> > 2. The fun factor: kmod can't load a funny screen saver program but the
> > blank.
> This is why we have XScreenSaver.

I use X very rarely.  

> Kmod isn't for loading screensavers _at all_.

I know, it's task of kerneld.  ;-) BTW:  Did you read the word _fun_?

> > 3. The didactic factor:  I really like configuring strange programs ;-)
> Kerneld is _obsolete_.  Do you keep libc5 around, too?

I know people doing that. Their reason:  libc5 is much smaller.  Your

Please, open your mind,
 regards, Frank.

Unsubscribe: send email to listar at
and put 'unsubscribe blfs-support' in the subject header of the message

More information about the blfs-support mailing list