Lee Revell said the following:
The reason I marked by response OT is that the time from power on to
userspace does not seem to be a big problem. It's the amount of time
from user space to presenting a login prompt that's way too long. My
distro (Debian) runs all the init scripts one at a time,
Nigel Cunningham said the following:
You warmed my heart until...
Good to know someone reads my email =)
Why not? : I guess you mean to the problem of slow booting in the first
place - I would agree with you there, but is there are reason why we
should have booting being the norm instead of
Wouldn't it be sufficient to have an applet in your UI (or dialog,
depending on your preference), which communicates with init and displays
the final initialization steps? Don't check your email until it says it has
started the services for email.
So now instead of watching the boot messages or
Helge Hafting wrote:
Well, this will depend on your email server (pop? imap? other?)
being up. Is it local on your machine, or external? Either way,
being able to launch an email client (or some new mail notification
app) shouldn't be a problem. It will simply not notice new mail until
the
On 07/18/05 10:12:29PM +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
Something's wondering me, though:
FreeBSD just (5.0) introduced devfs, so either they are behind The Facts
(see udev FAQ), or devfs (anylinux/anybsd) is not so bad after all.
There's not much to wonder about here, the basic idea of devfs
On 07/06/05 03:54:09PM -0700, Doug Wicks wrote:
How do I get off the mail list here?
Read the auto-appended signature at the bottom of every message.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jim.
-Original Message-
From: Hans Reiser [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2005
On 07/10/05 08:06:26PM +0400, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
On Sunday 10 July 2005 16:48, Ed Tomlinson wrote:
On Sunday 10 July 2005 01:10, Horst von Brand wrote:
Ed Cogburn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
David Lang wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2005, Ed Tomlinson wrote:
No Flame from me. One
On 07/10/05 08:01:26PM -0400, Ed Cogburn wrote:
Jim Crilly wrote:
But in most of the changesets on the bkbits site you can go back over 2
years and not see anything from namesys people. Nearly all of the fixes
commited in the past 2-3 years are from SuSe.
So, for the sake
On 07/10/05 10:43:03PM -0400, Ed Cogburn wrote:
Jim Crilly wrote:
but SGI doesn't release a new filesystem every 3 years with the
desire to remove and replace the old one.
Read Han's reply to Ed T. nearby. This is why I should have followed my own
original intent and not gotten back
On 07/11/05 07:09:46AM -0400, Ed Tomlinson wrote:
On Sunday 10 July 2005 20:01, Ed Cogburn wrote:
Jim Crilly wrote:
But in most of the changesets on the bkbits site you can go back over 2
years and not see anything from namesys people. Nearly all of the fixes
commited in the past 2
On 03/27/05 01:39:27PM -0500, Nick Orlov wrote:
On Sun, Mar 27, 2005 at 10:17:17AM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
On Sun, Mar 27, 2005 at 01:04:31PM -0500, Nick Orlov wrote:
- Whether the changes like the one above are the right thing to do ?
Yes.
Questionable.
- What's the best
On 03/29/05 10:37:52AM +0800, Coywolf Qi Hunt wrote:
Lee Revell wrote:
On Sat, 2005-03-26 at 10:28 -0800, Greg KH wrote:
On Sat, Mar 26, 2005 at 05:52:20PM +, Mark Fortescue wrote:
I am writing a Proprietry driver module for a Proprietry PCI card and
I have found that I can't use
Helge Hafting wrote:
No problem with the remote server, it does not depend on the local boot process.
The mail program connects directly to the remote server, all you need is the
network and it comes up so fast, it will come up way before X in a parallel
boot.
Depends on the implementation and
On 07/31/05 11:10:20PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
I really like having 250HZ as an _option_, but what I don't see is why
it should be the _default_. I believe this is Lee's position as
Last I checked, ACPI and CPU speed scaling were not enabled by default;
Kernel defaults are
On 08/01/05 12:36:16AM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
If the kernel defaults are irrelevant, then it would make more sense to
leave the default HZ as 1000 and not to enable the cpufreq and ACPI in
order to keep with the principle of least surprise for people who do use
kernel.org kernels.
On 08/01/05 09:26:00AM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
And there are older machines that won't boot with it enabled. The machine
I'm typing this on has a really shitty ACPI implementation, I don't remember
the details because it's been so long but I know that I have to disable
ACPI
for
On 12/03/06 08:59:10PM +0100, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
Ross Vandegrift wrote:
On Sun, Dec 03, 2006 at 12:58:24PM +0100, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
You mean the Used by column? No, it's not used by any other module
according to lsmod output.
Any other methods of checking what uses
On 03/27/05 01:39:27PM -0500, Nick Orlov wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 27, 2005 at 10:17:17AM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Sun, Mar 27, 2005 at 01:04:31PM -0500, Nick Orlov wrote:
> > >
> > > - Whether the changes like the one above are "the right thing to do" ?
> >
> > Yes.
>
> Questionable.
>
> >
>
On 03/29/05 10:37:52AM +0800, Coywolf Qi Hunt wrote:
> Lee Revell wrote:
> >On Sat, 2005-03-26 at 10:28 -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> >
> >>On Sat, Mar 26, 2005 at 05:52:20PM +, Mark Fortescue wrote:
> >>
> >>>I am writing a "Proprietry" driver module for a "Proprietry" PCI card and
> >>>I have
Lee Revell said the following:
The reason I marked by response OT is that the time from power on to
userspace does not seem to be a big problem. It's the amount of time
from user space to presenting a login prompt that's way too long. My
distro (Debian) runs all the init scripts one at a time,
Nigel Cunningham said the following:
You warmed my heart until...
Good to know someone reads my email =)
Why not? :> I guess you mean to the problem of slow booting in the first
place - I would agree with you there, but is there are reason why we
should have booting being the norm instead of
Wouldn't it be sufficient to have an applet in your UI (or dialog,
depending on your preference), which communicates with init and displays
the final initialization steps? Don't check your email until it says it has
started the services for email.
So now instead of watching the boot messages or
Helge Hafting wrote:
Well, this will depend on your email server (pop? imap? other?)
being up. Is it local on your machine, or external? Either way,
being able to launch an email client (or some "new mail" notification
app) shouldn't be a problem. It will simply not notice new mail until
the
Helge Hafting wrote:
No problem with the remote server, it does not depend on the local boot process.
The mail program connects directly to the remote server, all you need is the
network and it comes up so fast, it will come up way before X in a parallel
boot.
Depends on the implementation and
On 07/06/05 03:54:09PM -0700, Doug Wicks wrote:
> How do I get off the mail list here?
Read the auto-appended signature at the bottom of every message.
>
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
Jim.
> -Original Message-
> From: Hans Reiser [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 06,
On 07/10/05 08:06:26PM +0400, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
> On Sunday 10 July 2005 16:48, Ed Tomlinson wrote:
> > On Sunday 10 July 2005 01:10, Horst von Brand wrote:
> > > Ed Cogburn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > David Lang wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, 8 Jul 2005, Ed Tomlinson wrote:
> > >
> > > >
On 07/10/05 08:01:26PM -0400, Ed Cogburn wrote:
> Jim Crilly wrote:
>
> > But in most of the changesets on the bkbits site you can go back over 2
> > years and not see anything from namesys people. Nearly all of the fixes
> > commited in the past 2-3 years are from SuSe.
On 07/10/05 10:43:03PM -0400, Ed Cogburn wrote:
> Jim Crilly wrote:
>
> > but SGI doesn't release a new filesystem every 3 years with the
> > desire to remove and replace the old one.
>
> Read Han's reply to Ed T. nearby. This is why I should have followed
On 07/11/05 07:09:46AM -0400, Ed Tomlinson wrote:
> On Sunday 10 July 2005 20:01, Ed Cogburn wrote:
> > Jim Crilly wrote:
> >
> > > But in most of the changesets on the bkbits site you can go back over 2
> > > years and not see anything from namesys people. Nearly
On 07/31/05 11:10:20PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
>
> > I really like having 250HZ as an _option_, but what I don't see is why
> > it should be the _default_. I believe this is Lee's position as
> > Last I checked, ACPI and CPU speed scaling were not enabled by default;
>
> Kernel defaults
On 08/01/05 12:36:16AM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > If the kernel defaults are irrelevant, then it would make more sense to
> > leave the default HZ as 1000 and not to enable the cpufreq and ACPI in
> > order to keep with the principle of least surprise for people who do use
> > kernel.org
On 08/01/05 09:26:00AM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> >
> > And there are older machines that won't boot with it enabled. The machine
> > I'm typing this on has a really shitty ACPI implementation, I don't remember
> > the details because it's been so long but I know that I have to disable
> >
On 07/18/05 10:12:29PM +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
>
> Something's wondering me, though:
> FreeBSD "just" (5.0) introduced devfs, so either they are behind The Facts
> (see udev FAQ), or devfs (anylinux/anybsd) is not so bad after all.
There's not much to wonder about here, the basic idea of
On 12/03/06 08:59:10PM +0100, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
> Ross Vandegrift wrote:
> >On Sun, Dec 03, 2006 at 12:58:24PM +0100, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
> >>You mean the "Used by" column? No, it's not used by any other module
> >>according to lsmod output.
> >>
> >>Any other methods of checking
34 matches
Mail list logo
