On 3/2/07, Arnie Stender <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Tijnema ! wrote:
> On 3/1/07, Dan Nicholson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> On 3/1/07, Tijnema ! <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > On 2/28/07, Barius Drubeck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Second thing:
>> > > 1927 ?        00:00:00 smbd
>> > > 1932 ?        00:00:00 smbd
>> > > 1919 ?        00:00:00 winbindd
>> > > 1928 ?        00:00:00 winbindd
>> > >
>> > > You seem to be running multiple copies of certain daemons.  It is
>> > > possible that these daemons start child processes but I can't tell,
>> > > since your ps output doesn't use the -H option nor give the
PPID.  If
>> > > they are indeed duplicate instances, I can't predict the result but
I
>> > > don't think it is healthy.
>> >
>> > These are child processes, no need to worry about :)
>>
>> No, it is a problem. You have two copies of each process that are
>> trying to use the exact same resources. What happens when a request
>> comes in for smbd? Who gets it? They don't care that they're child
>> processes.
>
>
> I don't know, but it happens also when i just start them by hand.

Tijnema,

If you use the command 'ps -ef' you will get the PID (process ID) and
the PPID (parent process ID). Unless you have a lot of things starting
at the same time I would expect the PID of the child to be the next
consecutive number higher than the PID of the parent. If they are indeed
parent and child processes then the PPID of the child will be the same
as the PID of the parent. If the PPID of the child is not the same as
the PID of the parent then they are independent processes not
parent/child.


Yeah, they are really child processes, here's the part of 'ps -ef'

root 1941 1 0 Feb28 ? 00:00:00 nmbd

root *1945* 1 0 Feb28 ? 00:00:00 winbindd

root 1946 *1945* 0 Feb28 ? 00:00:00 winbindd

root *1950* 1 0 Feb28 ? 00:00:00 smbd

root 1953 *1950* 0 Feb28 ? 00:00:00 smbd

So it's fine i guess.


> > See again Dan's earlier posting.  KDM and startx are normally
> > alternative ways to start X.  By alternative, I mean mutually
> > exclusive, one or the other but not both.
>
> But there's no double X server running, i will do some expiriments with
it,
> but KDE is running fine again.
> Btw, i think KDM doesn't start, but i like it. It is my own server, and
when
> it starts up, i don't see a login screen, but i'm directly logged in as
root
> in KDE. That's what i always wanted :)

Then stop running kdm, kicker, etc. from the console. It's impossible
to know who has control in this situation. Why did your keyboard stop
working? I don't know, but starting up a bunch of extra processes
doesn't help narrow down problems.

If you don't want to use kdm, then use startx. This is explained in blfs:

http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/view/svn/kde/config.html

If you do this from a bootscript, the X session will be as running as
root. That would be an issue for me, but maybe not for you. It means
that anyone can press the power button on your computer has root
access.

--
Dan



I have removed kdm, kwin, kicker and kdesktop from my boot list, and now
(somehow) everything is working fine, except that my resolution is at
640x480, but i think that is because my nVidia drivers aren't loaded now...

Tijnema
-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Reply via email to