Re: System slows to REAL slug on boot
On Thu, Sep 16, 1999 at 02:24:11PM -0700, kvaughan@bc.cc.ca.us wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 17, 1999 at 12:55:04AM +0200, Marcin Owsiany wrote:
> >On Wed, Sep 15, 1999 at 09:53:01PM -0700, kaynjay@igalaxy.net wrote:
> >>
> >> I'm having problems with my system on rebooting to a new kernel. I don't know
> >> what is causing the problem, and have found nothing yet in the archives about
> [...]
> >> Anyone else see this kind of behavior?? Any thoughts?? Would it help if I
> >> got a list of the file names in /etc/init.d to list services in place?
> >
> >I would say something is eating up your resources so much you can't log in.
> >I would boot system into emergency or single mode and try switching off some
> >services and see if it/what helps... dhcpd would be number 1.
> >
>
> Thanks Marcin. I have already tried changing the dhclient (ISC) to dhcpcd
> 1.3 and still had the same slowdown.
>
> Is 2.2.9 known to be an ugly kernel w.r.t. networking or other??
Nothing that i would know of, but again - I'm no guru...
> When suggesting that services be switched off, do you mean to remove them
> fron init.d? My own approach to this has been to modify the names of the
> daemons so the script fails... make sense?
I don't know "The Right Way" to disable init.d scripts.
The proper way seems to be to run update-rc.d with appropiate arguments so
that all the links in rcx.d disappear, but than, to restore them you have to
remember the number (the sequence is important in some places)
Some people chmod -x /etc/init.d/script, but this gives nasty messages at
boot.
I personally add a "exit 0" line near the top of the /etc/init.d/script...
> Rookie question--how can I boot into single user mode... can that be done at
> the LILO prompt?
single mode: (runs only rcS)
<your_kernel_name> single
emergency mode: (runs only init, which only runs sulogin, / is ro)
<your_kernel_name> emergency
hope this helps
Marcin
--
---------------------------------
Marcin Owsiany
porridge@pandora.info.bielsko.pl
---------------------------------
Reply to: