Mailinglist Archive: opensuse (2831 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [SLE] Is there any real purpose for hald on a server-only system?
  • From: "Carlos E. R." <robin.listas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sun, 2 Jul 2006 02:21:37 +0200 (CEST)
  • Message-id: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0607020212320.12195@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


The Saturday 2006-07-01 at 19:17 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:

> > Interesting experiment - I'm getting tempted to do one myself.
>
> Which I've just done:
>
> I did an "insserv -r haldaemon" which complained about 'network"
> depending on 'haldaemon'. So I did an "insserv -rf haldaemon" instead
> and rebooted the box.
> Not having hald running doesn't seem to make much of difference.

It depends on which version of SuSE you are running; for 10.1 it would be
much different, I think.

It is not simply hotpluggable things. Try the command "lshal", and you
will see that it reports on fixed hardisks and partitions, video, chipset,
ethernet.... everything. And I tried with 9.3, as I say, with 10.1 it is
far more integrated, or so I have been told.

- --
Cheers,
Carlos Robinson

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.76

iD8DBQFEpxGStTMYHG2NR9URAqo9AKCTA04vUme/zbPTv3XANCmF+jxyaQCgioJz
8eDwWpLmzTrHkAidRcC1b/o=
=tayB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


--
Check the headers for your unsubscription address
For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@xxxxxxxx
Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com
Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@xxxxxxxx


< Previous Next >