Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 25 Apr 1996 15:50:25 -0700 (PDT) | From | Simon Shapiro <> | Subject | Re: 1.3.94 Ooops For Sale... |
| |
Hi Jonathan Layes; On 26-Apr-96 you wrote: > > On Apr 25, 22:11, bj0rn@blox.se (Bjorn Ekwall) wrote: > >Linus wrote: > >> Simon Shapiro wrote: > >> > Few more tidbits; > >> > death): > >> > > >> > 1. ``Ouch, kerneld wanted to sleep in interrupt'' every second or two > >> > 2. Login freezes after taking the login name on the console. > >> > 3. Existing telnet session totally frozen. > >> > 4. ``Cannot load interpreter'' in response to login - sometimes. > >> > > >> > This was preceeded by the same unholy stream of prophanity as described i n > >> > my previous posting under this title (``route to %p was born dead''). > >> > >> Ok, "kerneld" goes disabled in the next kernel, and won't be resuscitated u ntil > >> after 2.0 is out unless somebody really starts to look into this thing. I'm not > >> using kerneld personally, and for a few reasons I don't think I _will_ be u sing > >> it in the near future, so I won't be fixing this. > > Bjorn is right.... there is absolutely no need to disable kerneld, because > the problems described are exclusively arpd's fault.
I agree. The patient has a cold. No reason to kill him... :-)
> I have talked to Simon before about this - the solution is simple. Don't > turn on arpd until I can fix the problem. Something/one has changed the > behaviour of ARP in the past 10-15 releases and it hasn't been stable since, > in particular on machines with more than one interface. > Since arpd is marked as experimental and defaults to being off and there > is a lengthy explanation about its purpose in the make config help, I > don't see why this is such a big issue.
In itself, not a big issue, BUT:
1. Kerneld was disabled in this kernel 2. After few of these the machine died. This IS the ``big'' deal. 3. I innocently though that these are new problems and that the developers will be interested in them. I apologize for not recognizing Johnathan as such.
> For what it's worth, on a single interface machine on a class B network, > linux still performs better with arpd than without, even with the known > problems. So, I'm suggesting that it not be disabled just yet. Maybe > we just need to put the word experimental in all caps, blinking and boldface.
A hammer to smack the hand that clicks the `y' will help too.
Sincerely Yours, (Sent on 04/25/96, 15:50:25 by XF-Mail)
Simon Shapiro Director of Technology i-Connect.Net, a Division of iConnect Corp. Shimon@i-Connect.Net 13455 SW Allen Blvd., Suite 140 Beaverton OR 97008
| |