> Yech.. sounds nutty and dangerous.
> Why dont you just load appropiate modules directly without kerneld ?
>
> I have said before that kerneld _might_ have a place somewhere where
> underpowered hardware is the _only_ choise. (compare travelling 3000
> km's with bicycle instead by airplane).
>
> Saving 100-300 kilobytes of memory is truly not worth the hassle in
> any 'normal' systems.
> Lauri Tischler, Network Admin Tel: +358-0-47846331
In my opinion kerneld is the best thing since sliced bread (at least whitin
the linux context). I can't imagine that anyone seriously can think that to
load modules manually or compile everything into the kernel is final answer
here. It's true that not everything works as smoothly as one might wish
with kerneld yet, but remember that it's a relativly new addition to linux
and that it takes a certain amount of time to fix all the problems with any
new solutions.
Myself I use it and will certainly continue to use it.
kind regards,
kjell m.