Ethan Benson schrieb:
>
> odd that it didn't apply cleanly, i made it against a potato kerneld
> script... (maybe your not following security updates, modutils was
> upgraded about 5 times to fix the same bug recently...)
Yup. You got me. No security updates applied.
(Definitely not a -pnum argum
On Tue, Dec 05, 2000 at 01:00:16AM +0100, scr wrote:
>
> Thank you very much for your suggestions and the patch against
> /etc/init.d/kerneld you supplied. Well, for your patch: this
> doesn´t apply cleanly to my (plain potato) kerneld script, but
> I got the idea. ;-)
odd that it didn't apply cl
Ethan Benson schrieb:
>
> its true that the tests used in the kerneld initscript is flawed,
> it checks for /proc/sys/kernel/modprobe which will not exist in
> two cases:
>
> 1) your running 2.0 kernels, and thus need kerneld
> 2) your running 2.2 without loadable module support.
>
> the flawed
On Sun, Dec 03, 2000 at 09:36:03PM +0100, scr wrote:
>
> It looks like (I haven´t digged deeply) those scripts
> `modutils´ and `kerneld´ from /etc/init.d are responsible
> for several warnings I get during boot of a hand-rolled
> kernel (I think it´s kernel-source from plain potato,
> although I
Hi all!
I´m a litte confused about init scripts from /etc/init.d
when used booting from a monolithic (ie.e non-modularized)
kernel (beeing new to debian *and* 2.2 kernels).
It looks like (I haven´t digged deeply) those scripts
`modutils´ and `kerneld´ from /etc/init.d are responsible
for several
5 matches
Mail list logo
