On Thu, Oct 10, 2002 at 12:05:15PM -0700, Petro wrote:
> I've got 2 border machines running Debian Potato, and I recently (2
> days ago) did a security update on it for the first time in 4 or 5
> months.
> On one of these machines, I also upgraded SSH.
>
I've got 2 border machines running Debian Potato, and I recently (2
days ago) did a security update on it for the first time in 4 or 5
months.
On one of these machines, I also upgraded SSH.
Then Idled stopped working on that machine.
So I have 2 machines tha
I'm wondering how feasible it is to use idled to kill idle X sessions
after some period of inactivity. My understanding was that idled only
idles terminal sessions, and the man page doesn't disabuse me of this
view.
Am I wrong on this?
Peace.
--
Karsten M. Self
I've seen some slowdown's also when kapm-idled is enabled in the kernel:
processes would be slower starting
HD access was slower
screen refresh was slower
etc...
Using kernel 2.4.9 on a Dell Latitude CP M233ST.
Once I recompiled without the option, my speed is back.
I n
On 04 Sep 2001 09:53:03 +0100
Ross Burton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 2001-09-03 at 22:34, Eric G. Miller wrote:
> > AFAIK, kapm-idled has something to do with apm management on newer
> > kernels. That 80% CPU usage is apparently something of a lie, since
>
On Mon, 2001-09-03 at 22:34, Eric G. Miller wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 04, 2001 at 05:07:47AM +0800, csj wrote:
> > What is kapm-idled and why is it consuming up to 80% CPU? It's most
> > malevolent when my computer is doing nothing useful. What's the graceful
> >
On Tue, Sep 04, 2001 at 05:07:47AM +0800, csj wrote:
> What is kapm-idled and why is it consuming up to 80% CPU? It's most
> malevolent when my computer is doing nothing useful. What's the graceful
> way to disable or shut it down (assuming that doing so would not harm my
>
What is kapm-idled and why is it consuming up to 80% CPU? It's most
malevolent when my computer is doing nothing useful. What's the graceful
way to disable or shut it down (assuming that doing so would not harm my
system)?
apropos kapm
kapm: nothing appropriate
On Mon, 11 Jun 2001, Dave Sherohman wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 04:13:45PM +0200, vester wrote:
> > can anyone explain to me what exactly the process kapm-idled does and why
> > it takes up 50-90% of cpu usage?
>
> Kernel APM IDLE Daemon
>
> It's a pseu
On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 04:13:45PM +0200, vester wrote:
> can anyone explain to me what exactly the process kapm-idled does and why
> it takes up 50-90% of cpu usage?
Kernel APM IDLE Daemon
It's a pseudo process that doesn't actually _do_ anything. It just puts the
CPU to sl
can anyone explain to me what exactly the process kapm-idled does and why
it takes up 50-90% of cpu usage?
i've never noticed it taking up that much usage until today. i cannot stop
it from top...i suppose it's got something to do with the apm kernel
modules, but i really don'
Lukas Ruf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> strange enough to me, kapm-idled consumes between 23% and 90% of the
> CPU. Why?
It consumes that much, because your system is idleing. ;) It's the
kapm *idle* daemon, and the more CPU time this kernel thread gets, the
more your system i
Lukas Ruf wrote:
> strange enough to me, kapm-idled consumes between 23% and 90% of the
> CPU. Why?
kapm-idled makes HLT calls when the CPU is not used.
http://sdb.suse.de/en/sdb/html/tami_kapm-idled.html> explains this
(don't bother about this being on .suse.de ... it's a fe
Dear List,
strange enough to me, kapm-idled consumes between 23% and 90% of the
CPU. Why?
My Configuration:
2.4.5
iptables
X
Does anyone know any special ways on how to solve this issue?
Kind regards,
Lukas
--
Lukas RufSwiss Federal Institute of
Dig this:
3 root 20 0 00 0 SW 0 74.0 0.0 672:35 kapm-idled
10858 root 10 0 35540 8332 1628 S 0 0.5 6.5 0:03 X
4208 root 9 0 968 964 744 S 0 0.3 0.7 0:14 dozed
31364 krzys 10 0 1492 1492 692 R 0 0.3 1.1 0:00
OK, I know it's just an idle daemon, but what do I need to adjust in my
Woody setup so it's not included in the system load? I don't need to
disable apm, do I?
Probably a FAQ somewhere, right...?
--
Jonathan Markevich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://www.geocities.com/jmarkevich
The penalty for lau
root 17 0 0 0 0 SW 0 26.8 0.0 184:02 kapm-idled
>
> what is kapm-idled ? what is it supposed to do?
I'm sorry for the delay...
It's for APM (adv. power management).
But it's okay now, I have installed the 2.4.0 release kernel and there's
no problem on the APM now.
Oki
Oki DZ wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Recently I switched the kernel to the 2.4-test10 version, and I then I
> have the following:
> PID USER PRI NI SIZE RSS SHARE STAT LIB %CPU %MEM TIME COMMAND
> 2 root 17 0 00 0 SW 0 26.8 0.0 184:02 kapm-idled
what is ka
Hi,
Recently I switched the kernel to the 2.4-test10 version, and I then I
have the following:
PID USER PRI NI SIZE RSS SHARE STAT LIB %CPU %MEM TIME COMMAND
2 root 17 0 00 0 SW 0 26.8 0.0 184:02 kapm-idled
Why is that...?
BTW, I use Debian 2.2 on an Intel machine
for it, makes things alot simpler.
On Sat, Dec 26, 1998 at 07:46:27PM -0500, Tom wrote:
> I decided to try the idled package which disconnects users after being
> idle for a specified period of time. When I first discovered that it
> does not recognize someone in X as using the machine I
On Sat, 26 Dec 1998 19:46:27 -0500, Tom wrote:
>My current idea is to remark out the line which loads this thing at boot
>up. I am not sure how to do that, or even which file I need to edit.
>Any help is appreiciated. Thanks
cd /etc/init.d
grep *
(IE, grep apache * will find all cases of apa
I decided to try the idled package which disconnects users after being
idle for a specified period of time. When I first discovered that it
does not recognize someone in X as using the machine I tried to
uninstall it using dselect. After rebooting I was still being kicked or
the system after 60
On Sat, 01 Nov 1997 21:48:52 EST Paul Miller ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
> I'm looking for a timeout program which will _NOT_ kill my xterm sessions
> but will kill my idle telnet sessions. I attempted to do this with idled
> by making it ignore users in a 'console
I'm looking for a timeout program which will _NOT_ kill my xterm sessions
but will kill my idle telnet sessions. I attempted to do this with idled
by making it ignore users in a 'console' group which the login program
added to the user's groups. The only problem is XDM does
Has anyone noticed idled causing crashes/reboots ?
Matthew
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble?
e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Has anyone been able to setup idled so it'll kill a telnet user, but won't
kill the same user running xterm under X? (telnet and xterm both use
/dev/ttyp*)
I had an idea to exempt everyone in the 'console' group from idled.. --
the login program will add users to specific
or
else it fills up with 'TOO MANY USERS; RECOMPILE' or something.
I attached my /etc/idled.cf for you in a separate message.
TL
On Sun, 5 Oct 1997, Paul Miller wrote:
> From: Paul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Debian User
> Date: Sun, 5 Oct 1997 11:43:24 -0400 (EDT)
>
Is anyone using the idled package? It does kick anyone off... I tried
restarting it and it still doesn't do anything.. has anyone gotten this
package to work?
-Paul
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Trouble? e
On Sun, 19 Jan 1997, Matthew Tebbens wrote:
>
> Just tried to install idled. It requires libc5 5.4.17-1 or better.
> All I can find is 5.4.13-1, which is already installed on my system.
> What am I missing, or where should I look ??
> Thanks..Matthew
>
Perl and zlib have the
Just tried to install idled. It requires libc5 5.4.17-1 or better.
All I can find is 5.4.13-1, which is already installed on my system.
What am I missing, or where should I look ??
Thanks..Matthew
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
[EMAIL
30 matches
Mail list logo
