[LARTC] cbq.init v 0.6.1

[LARTC] cbq.init v 0.6.1

[Rick]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1", Size: 380 bytes --]

Has anyone tried to run this in "/etc/rc.d/init.d/cbq"  (after renaming) ??

I always have this error:

modprobe: Can't locate module sch_cbq
**CBQ: could not load module sch_cbq

This occurs even though i have recompiled the kernel (2.2.17 - Linux Mandrake 7.2) with all the QoS options clicked YES.

Anyone has any idea how to resolve this??


Regards.


[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1184 bytes --]

[LARTC] cbq.init v 0.6.1

[David]

<PRE>&gt;<i> Rick Goh Siow Mong wrote:
</I>&gt;<i> 
</I>&gt;<i> Has anyone tried to run this in &quot;/etc/rc.d/init.d/cbq&quot;  (after
</I>&gt;<i> renaming) ??
</I>&gt;<i> 
</I>&gt;<i> I always have this error:
</I>&gt;<i> 
</I>&gt;<i> modprobe: Can't locate module sch_cbq
</I>&gt;<i> **CBQ: could not load module sch_cbq
</I>&gt;<i> 
</I>&gt;<i> This occurs even though i have recompiled the kernel (2.2.17 - Linux
</I>&gt;<i> Mandrake 7.2) with all the QoS options clicked YES.
</I>&gt;<i> 
</I>&gt;<i> Anyone has any idea how to resolve this??
</I>&gt;<i> 
</I>&gt;<i> 
</I>&gt;<i> Regards.
</I>&gt;<i> 
</I>
First, pls turn off HTML (next offense gets your request sent to
/dev/null).

Second -- you said it all.  You answered Y to all the QOS stuff rather
than M, so you have no modules, it's all compiled into the kernel (why
do folks insist on building monstrous monolithic kernels??).

Either modify the cbq script or rebuild the QOS as modules.

Ciao,

David A. Bandel
-- 
Focus on the dream, not the competition.
		-- Nemesis Racing Team motto


</PRE>

[LARTC] cbq.init v 0.6.1

[Guy]

<PRE>&gt;<i> 
</I>&gt;<i> Second -- you said it all.  You answered Y to all the QOS stuff rather
</I>&gt;<i> than M, so you have no modules, it's all compiled into the kernel (why
</I>&gt;<i> do folks insist on building monstrous monolithic kernels??).
</I>&gt;<i> 
</I>

Why tinkering with modules if you have the memory available anyway?
I have built a kernel with all I  need in it, and all I don't need out 
of it.
I think it is a lot easier (I never have to check whether module x or y 
is already loaded or not..).
With todays memory prices &quot;monstrous&quot; kernels are not a problem anymore 
anyway.

However, it is useful if you have to test new kernel functionality, or 
for building distributions with broad application possibilities.
But I do not see any reason to NOT build a monolithic kernel for just 
your own system.

Guy



</PRE>

[LARTC] cbq.init v 0.6.1

[David]

<PRE>Guy Van Den Bergh wrote:
&gt;<i> 
</I>[snip]
&gt;<i> 
</I>&gt;<i> However, it is useful if you have to test new kernel functionality, or
</I>&gt;<i> for building distributions with broad application possibilities.
</I>&gt;<i> But I do not see any reason to NOT build a monolithic kernel for just
</I>&gt;<i> your own system.
</I>&gt;<i> 
</I>
No real reason not to build monolithic.  Unfortunately (or fortunately)
most scripts (mine included) _assume_ modules, and if not present abort
with a &quot;not supported&quot; message.  This may not be correct, but it's
done.  And apparently, I'm not alone in assuming a modular kernel (as
evidenced by the cbq.init script doing the same thing mine would do), so
the script will have to be adjusted by the user to account for this.

Ciao,

David A. Bandel
-- 
Focus on the dream, not the competition.
		-- Nemesis Racing Team motto


</PRE>