On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 09:42:19AM +0100, Egbert Jan wrote: > Because IF I need to attach a console I do that to catch each and > every information that could help me find any problems during boot.
The boot process as it is (and has been for years) already doesn't give a whole lot of information. You usually have correlate its output with syslog and/or dmesg and/or deamon specific log files to really narrow down on a problem. That said, Plymouth is actually supposed to make this /better/. I'm not sure if that's going to happen for Lucid (it's not really my area), but the idea is that since there's something in charge of collecting output from boot scripts and presenting it to the user, that something can also put this information in a log file. This means that that anyhing you see during boot should end up in a log file which should alleviate the need for looking at the boot sequence. Yes, that's a lot of "should"'s, but I'm afraid that's all I have right now. Someone else may be able to weigh in with some more authoritative information or at least more detail. > But what heck, nobody asked to have fancy server bootspash screens on > servers. That's simply not true. /You/ may not have asked for it, but it's certainly been asked for. I myself, for instance, don't mind a pretty boot sequence (brief as it may be). > PS I switched from years and years of Mandriva usage to Ubuntu because > I got the impression that Ubuntu developers WERE paying attention to > what the community wants. I like to think that we do. However, please consider that the community is diverse as are its opinions on different matters. -- Soren Hansen Ubuntu Developer http://www.ubuntu.com/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
-- ubuntu-server mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
