Re: 1.3.94 Ooops For Sale...

Simon Shapiro (Shimon@i-connect.net)
Thu, 25 Apr 1996 15:50:25 -0700 (PDT)


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