Re: Strange Cron Job
Quoting bwarsing@intergate.bc.ca (bwarsing@intergate.bc.ca):
> Mmmm...
>
> Can somebody tell me what this means...
>
> >From root@intergate.bc.ca Fri Oct 15 00:40:08 1999
> >Envelope-to: root@intergate.bc.ca
> >Received: from root by WEASEL with local (Exim 3.03 #1 (Debian))
> > id 11c1y8-0000j6-00
> > for <root@intergate.bc.ca>; Fri, 15 Oct 1999 00:40:04 -0700
> >From: root@intergate.bc.ca (Cron Daemon)
> >To: root@intergate.bc.ca
> >Subject: Cron <root@WEASEL> test -f /proc/modules && /sbin/rmmod -a
> >X-Cron-Env: <SHELL=/bin/sh>
> >X-Cron-Env: <HOME=/root>
> >X-Cron-Env: <PATH=/usr/bin:/bin>
> >X-Cron-Env: <LOGNAME=root>
> >Message-Id: <E11c1y8-0000j6-00@WEASEL>
> >Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1999 00:40:05 -0700
> >Status: RO
> >Content-Length: 45
> >Lines: 2
>
> >rmmod: QM_MODULES: Function not implemented
>
> It was generated by the cron.daliy entry 'modutils':
>
> */20 * * * * root test -f /proc/modules && /sbin/rmmod -a
>
> ...after I upgraded to potato I began receving this message in my
> mailbox precisely every 20 min. But, I have no idea what it is
> trying to tell me.
The cron job: I think 2.2.x kernels no longer remove modules after
one minute as the 2.0.x kernels did, but a cron job pops up and
looks through /proc/modules to see what to remove.
The error message: I've seen this one, but I can't remember exactly
what it means. However, I got it when I was playing around with
the sound modules. Most likely, I did a modprobe which partly
failed but didn't roll back correctly (which I think it's meant to).
Once I'd figured out the right modules to load, I didn't see it
again. You can perhaps check if this is right by trying yourself
to rmmod any module that has a zero usage count and no dependents.
But IIRC I cleared the problem by rebooting to give me a clean
kernel.
Cheers,
--
Email: d.wright@open.ac.uk Tel: +44 1908 653 739 Fax: +44 1908 655 151
Snail: David Wright, Earth Science Dept., Milton Keynes, England, MK7 6AA
Disclaimer: These addresses are only for reaching me, and do not signify
official stationery. Views expressed here are either my own or plagiarised.
Reply to: