[lkml]   [1996]   [May]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRE: If we're "voting" on kerneld. . .

> From: Lauri Tischler

> I still don't see any use for kerneld on 'normal' systems. The only
> use I would have for it, would be to handle lp (printer) and ppa (Zip-
> drive) intelligently. I just wonder what would happed if I tried to
> mount my Zip-drive while printing a large job. How would kerneld
> know that it should NOT 'rmmod' the lp-driver while the printing is
> going on. Wise versa, if I were dumping a backup to the Zip-drive
> and then started printjob from another console, what would happen ?

It would seem that the lp module gets a use count of 2 and one gets done
it only gets lowered once so not removed until the second one gets

Personally I like kerneld becuase of the sound driver which is quite
large. I don't use sound that often, but when I do, I don't have to stop,
become root and load the module...

It seems the whole point behind modules is to allow you to add and remove
functionality at will... and not have to recompile your kernel, or add
the functionality while already running. But, you have to switch to root
and add the module. With kerneld that happens automaticaly. You don't
have to be root. You don't have stop to do it, it happens on the fly. I
think the lack of kerneld reduces the usefulness of modules.


 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:37    [W:0.017 / U:22.932 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site