Re: controlling the load average
Ah, so it is the same bug that is supposed to be fixed on master now?
(earlier message). Good, it will go away soon then.
--
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
| .-'''''-. Kevin Puetz |
| .' _/| `. |
| : =/_/ : puetzk@iastate.edu -preferred |
| : _/ | : kp11901@cedarnet.org |
| (\ / ,| : puetz@penguinpowered.com |
| \\/^\/||__ : |
| _/~`~`""~`"` \_ .' "Could you please continue the petty |
| __/ -'/ `-._ `\_\__ bickering? I find it - most intriguing." |
|/ /-'` `\ \ \-.\ --Data, STTNG, "Haven" |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
----------
>From: Wichert Akkerman <wichert@cs.leidenuniv.nl>
>To: Kevin Puetz <puetzk@iastate.edu>
>Cc: Debian GNU/Linux PPC <debian-powerpc@lists.debian.org>
>Subject: Re: controlling the load average
>Date: Wed, Oct 6, 1999, 6:06 PM
>
> Previously Kevin Puetz wrote:
>> At the and of apt-get upgrade (which installed about 40 packages! yikes!),
>> it finished normally, but within about 10-15 seconds of that load going
>> away, my machine began to get choppy again. I managed to get top up (which
>> took a while!), and saw at the top of the list, afterstep, with about 80Megs
>> of RAM in use (RSS) and steadily climbing and equally high processor usage.
>
> It's not really afterstep, but the afterstep-phase of update-menu. What
> happens is that update-menu runs the scripts in /etc/menu-methods,
> and the process-name you see in ps is also the script-name. In your
> case afterstep, but it could have been any of the scripts there.
>
> Wichert.
>
> --
> ==============================================================================
> This combination of bytes forms a message written to you by Wichert Akkerman.
> E-Mail: wichert@cs.leidenuniv.nl
> WWW: http://www.wi.leidenuniv.nl/~wichert/
>
Reply to: