[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: kerneld activity



I am sorry I did not mention in my previous email that Ioannis Tambouras
send me a suggestion about my problem. He suggested using the kdstat
program to see if I could find anything useful Unfortunately, I could not
get far with his suggestion. The kdstat program whn run produces the
following output 
Version 2.0.0, pid=360, delay=60, nokeep, nodebug
no jobs waiting

If I try kdstat debug 
this comes up 
Version 2.0.0, pid=360, delay=60, nokeep, debug
no jobs waiting

There is no manpage or info page ( not in my system anyway ) about this
program. So I didn't know what to do with it. Since my previous email I
realised that the same phenomenon happens in another computer on which I
have installed Debian . This has a newer version of the kernel ( 2.0.27) .
So the old version of the kernel must not be the cause of the problem . As
this problem does not
affect in any way my work I do not worry about it much. However since I am
new to Debian I do not know whether this is bug of a feature of some kind
for kerneld
and so I do not think it would be right to file a bug report
( I don't think I asked anybody else to do this for me as Ioannis implied
). Anyway I am sorry to bother the list in any way.
Any help or suggestion about this or about the use of kernel-image as I
explained in my previous mail is more that
welcome and will be appreciated !!! 


                                       Thank you very much 
                                       George

PS Anyway since the e-mail that Ioannis sent to me was personal I think
that my slip in not acknowledging his help in my previous email could have
been dealt with in private without further burdening the already heavily
used list. Thanks again.  


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
George Kapetanios
Churchill College
Cambridge, CB3 0DS              
U.K.                            E-Mail: GK205@hermes.cam.ac.uk
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Reply to: