remove everything you don't need from your kernel. Move everything you don't need at startup in modules, then don't start any services/daemons you don't need, then you'll boot up in less than 30 seconds.
(i've donne a LFS that boot up in a blink of an eye... and it doesn't use any parallel startup)
Sorry, but unless you have uneeded Adaptec Controllers on your system and built in, then hardly AYNTHING is going to slow you down from a kernel perspective.
My boot process spends about 10-15 seconds just booting the kernel and probing/initializing devices. When I played with initng, the actually init process to login screen was faster than the kernel!
how it is possible. that one can able to boot his pc with in 10 secs.
is there any technique then plz sahre it. b/c i also want to adopt it
and want to get rid of those start up things which i have to bear while my pc is booting up.
i use a machspeed viper gt4 socket 939 motherboard and that solved all my problems with xp i never takes long usually 15 sec. and i have quake4, area 51, cold fear, and doom3 demo, and fear install along with nero7 and windvd media creater and printers and trend micro 2006 antivirus with real time virus and spyware and lot of other programs. and if i can boot fast i know you can. this is my 1st machspeed board, but i will definitely buy more !!!!!!
ps. i am system builder gaming and budget so i have used everyone asus, msi, gigabyte, pc chips, msrock, biostar, and soltek, many others this quickest i seen. price great $100 ut gives sli,usb 2.0 ,and sata 1 and 2 3.0gb/s both raid nvidia 4 chipset ultra not regular nforce4. trendmicro 2006 virus free 1 year included and 8 channel sound and overclock detailed features in bios. and watchdog so if you overclock to much set back to last limit that work.
once hybrid drives are comon place (probably by the time they actually start 2.7) perhaps the kernel will fit into it's flash. that should hasten boot time considerably
The time it takes to read the kernel from disk does not slow bootup noticeably. It adds maybe a second. It's the eleventy billion files that userspace accesses during bootup, as well as all the driver, network and other protocol timeouts that get serialized.
A hybrid drive will speed up reading many of the files and metadata used in early boot by eliminating seeks and rotational latency. We still need to do something about all the timeouts I mentioned above.
The other thing that hybrid drives might speed up is journal replay and journaling in general, if the journal itself gets shadowed to flash. For this to be reliable and fast, the journal would actually need to live in RAM, and backed up to flash on (perhaps unexpected) power-down. This requires isolating the RAM, flash and their controller, and giving them enough backup juice to allow this emergency transfer to happen.
I don't think this approach will help on a single CPU box.
When the machine is coming up, the cpu must be cranking at 100%, so this parallel approach will not help on a single CPU box because the CPU will be a bottleneck.
What about suspending Linux to disk? It is supported in 2.6 AFAIK.
Does it work?
BTW, Windows after it showed the UI, still continues to do some background jobs, so it is not completely usable at this point, whereas Linux finishes ALL bootup jobs after it shows UI.
I can't really agree. Lots of the startup time is spent idling, waiting for things outside the processor to happen (network, printers etc). This time could be worth spending on something useful...
Most time is "wasted" through the use of initscripts.
If you want a startup from the moment the kernel is ready to activate userspace to the time you have a "login" prompt or a [gxk]dm login that is about 5 seconds i would advise you to look at "daemontools" from mr. bernstein. there is a similar approach being used in the "runit" tools from a debian developer. That is the system i currently use. it replaces the /sbin/init binary with a minimalistic programm that first sets up the base system (fscking mounting network and so on) till it is safe to start the daemons.. that is done in parallel and without scripts. this step takes about 1-2 seconds.
search google for daemontools or look at cr.yp.to
search google for runit if you own a debian box
My 700Mhz laptop loads slackware 10 with kde (autologin to my user account) faster than my 2.4ghz workstation loads windows 2000 to the login screen. The windows machine shows a nice graphic that had a progress bar, then it goes to another screen with yet another progress bar, etc. and the linux machine only looks slower because I don't get a graphical screen until its just about ready to let me use it.
I'd still like linux to load faster though. I'm sure that its trying to probe for a bunch of hardware that I don't have. and running scripts for things I don't care.
Is there a simple recipe for loading essentials at boot, showing graphic login, then loading the rest of the stuff? For example, I like to run httpd and mysql on my machine because I do a lot of test/development on my machines, but I'd like to be able to login as those programs load, or those programs can load, say, 1 minute after the boot process is finished. That would give me time to login, and start up my email program and whatever before my machine gets hit again by loading services.
The boot process is pretty slow because the scripts tend to be sleepy. The boot process is idle most of the time. The boot process of linux under vmware show on gkrellm that its pretty much in idle.
Here what I did to do a faster boot. It may not work for you
edit /etc/inittab
scroll down to this line:
l5:5:wait:/etc/rc.d/rc 5
and change it to:
l5:5:wait:/etc/rc.d/rc 5 &
of course anything that requests user input during start up will be lost. This will start the GUI while running the init process, which are mostly services, in excutes in background.
When a machine starts up it does alot of sleeping waiting for hardware to complete it's own initialisation phase etc. You can shave 5 sec from load by making UHCI module initialise in background. Prolly same for EHCI too.
You remember correctly. And SUSE 9.2 has a few more tricks to improve boot times. It's still not as fast as it could be, but definitely the fastest booting linux distro I've ever had.
You posted on the 18th of October, about 2 weeks before SuSE 9.2 became available. I bought it this week and installed it last night.
'Slow' is no longer the word to use when describing booting (SuSE 9.1 was slow), try 'turgid', 'glacial' or whatever. I have not got around to timing the boot process yet, but would guess at somewhere between 5 and 10 minutes. 9.1 took something like 3-4 minutes and *that* was a lot worse than previous levels.
Hardware is: Via C3/866 with 768MB Memory. Several partitions spread over two IDE discs (hda and hdd). The previous 'shutdown' was clean.
The parts that look really awful are:
- mounting Reiserfs partitions
- loading the modules needed.
both processes take minutes.
I am considering converting various partitions to XFS from Reiser to see if that speeds things up.
btw. I found this post using google, I was trying to find out if someone else was in the same mess.
You can expect to skip the reiserfs mount penalty. That single thing is indeed rather annoying as it can spend 5-10 seconds mounting a modest filesystem.
I was in the same situation, the loading of modules took decades... so I recompiled the kernel with only the drivers for my hardware (only for advanced/experts users).
It is time to deselect all things that are not needed and test the new kernel, seeing with dmesg if all is detected as with the stock kernel of your distro.
I use kubuntu, and there are a lot of howtos to recompile your own kernel, and compiling the kernel for your processor adds a plus of speed. This can help the thing, and adding initNG to the proccess helps much more.
Dude, my box is up in like 30 to 45 seconds (I've never counted). The longest thing to load is the hotswap hardware driver, which is like 8 seconds at most. Have you ever used that one operating system out there? Something-or-other XP? It takes like 5 minutes to boot, then when you log in it takes another 3 to stop grinding the hard drive and loading all the spyware/adware that you inevitably have installed. Ever try NT?, same thing. Anyway, enough bashing on crappy OS's. Dude, if your machine is taking a long time to start up, then something is clearly wrong. Stop loading so much overhead junk!
My old debian and my new kubuntu hoary's, both with default desktop setups are something like 2 to 3 times slower than my default configuration of XP (>1.5 minutes Linux vs 30-40seconds XP). Don't say the problem/difference is not there. INIT like startup is singlethread and very inefficient, with lots of sleeps within the scripts. The ideal would be to load things just when we need then and load independent 'dependencies' in paralel when possible. Sample, kdm requires to start X that requires graphic chip modules, mouse support, keyboard, etc... things get up as soon as dependencies are met. Has someone been working in something like this already?
Any gains from a parrallel boot proccess will be small, not to mention a pain to setup properly, to really increase boot times rewrite your init scripts to bypass language checks, and checks for hardware you don't have, (I know mandrake checks for a brail terminal), distros init scripts are made to startup a wide veriaty of systems configurations, and have tons of error checks. custom making one for your system setup will do much more for boot times then anything else.
Rough times (eyeballed from my watch):
Shutdown: ~20 seconds (starting from gdm).
Boot: ~24 seconds (from grub's menu to gdm - including nvidia splash screen).
List of major services (probably not to many compared to most people):
cupsd metalog eth0 netmount ntp-client sshd vcron xdm
Computer: P4 2.4Ghz, 1Gb DDR ram, GeForce FX 5200, 80 Gb ide hdd.
Well, my rather old computer takes most time starting up the bios, so only after 30 seconds or more I'm in Grub. After that it takes 15 to 20 seconds to be in console, so booting Linux is fast enough, it's the bios that's slow for me. Starting X takes only some seconds, but I use Fluxbox. Ldconfig takes a few seconds which could be saved by disabling it, but it's really not worth it.
For the most part, processor speed doesn't matter too much (but it all depends on what you are loading, a system with server services will go a lot slower on a slow box). Still on a home setup, it generally makes little difference (~5 secs? not including system post, old pentiums with 64 or less ram perhaps).
If you want a speedier bios bootup, I suggest your next computer use LinuxBios if possible, and I'm hoping it will be. Still depending on the Bios, if it has a 'Quick Post' option, use it; unfortunately many BIOS's are very featureless (except my ol' buddy award [maybe others, but not many.]).
No, not too old, but computers seem to be old quicky. The average age of the parts is old enough though (monitor from 1996 and it's stuffed in a 286 case). Linuxbios is nice, but not really worth it, because of the lack of features and because newer computers boot fast enough anyway.
In the end it doesn't matter that your pc boots in 3 seconds if you must wait 10 seconds before your browser starts.
Personally I think LinuxBios could be very cool, in the future, since it more or less hands off starting the computer to the linux kernel, which imho is a very good idea. Unfortunately it needs more support; I'm not sure what you mean by features, specifically, but I would imagine if it hands off doing most of the bios functions to the linux kernel, a lot of features could be created. If I ever feel like building a 'carputer' I'll definitely want linuxbios, but that's off topic.
I also don't see why a p3 600 would go through bios faster than the newest computer of today (mostly it seems to depend on the bios, I have on comp that always checks the ram - that's annoying).
286 case wow? My old 286 case is about the size of one of those slimline cases, not much can be done with that with regular components (you can always buy a $1 switch at some place like RadioShack and put all the components in a cardboard box if you really want to "slum it").
It would be very cool if the mobo manufacturers would support bioslinux. By features I mean that I am able to control voltage and multiplier settings (I need to underclock that p3 otherwise it's unstable).
I also don't see why a p3 600 would go through bios faster than the newest computer of today
Well, I noticed that my p3 is very slow at booting compared with other, newer pcs. Those take only a few seconds in the bios bootup.
I needed a case, it was laying around and it fit, ok?
I have a P3/600 that boots like lightening. It's an old Dell L600r, and it takes a few seconds only from power on to grub. To be honest I have no clue what particular settings did that, but I will muck around when i come back from work.
On my AMD K7 500MHz/256RAM/12Go HDD/Asus mobo/nv X driver/slack 10, it takes:
- from swithc on to GRUB: 11s (BIOS time)
- from GRUB to KDM: 58s, but including:
* ldconfig
* hotplug script parse
* dhclient to connect to my ISP
- from KDM to shutdown: 14s
Didn't looked at KDE time. What seems to be slow for me is ldconfig, hotplug, dhclient and kdm.
BIOS - on PC-style hardware this accounts for a lot of delay - not much you can do...
Lag because of slow textscrolling - booting with the option quiet will help a lot
Hardware that requires delay according to specs or because of bugs - disable unused hardware in the BIOS
The rest really amounts to userland problems rather than kernel delays. On a system where you store an uncompressed kernel-image in flash or similar you can easily boot to userland in half a second with a nicely tuned kernel. Less with a bit of effort.
GUI login manager (kdm/xdm) is started last by default, you can
move its startup link to rcS.d, just after critical ones.
Actual order depends on your system, usually you can start xdm/kdm even before modutils.
I'm using such setup on my Debian desktop.
No problem. Use a shell script as init. Don't use the distro crap that does everything and then some on every boot...
I just start the necessary gettys and that's it. My startup is just a few seconds of kernel messages scrolling by. Then when I want to start X11 and KDE, that's not very fast.
All this talk about startup times....why do you ever have to reboot your linux machine?! Other than on my laptop, I could care less if it took 5 minutes to boot my machine, because it's so rare that I ever have to reboot.
because, unlike those who live in the continent of north america, south of canada and north of mexico, the rest of the world actually does care about how much pollution and green house gases get produced.
If you only use your pc 8 hours a day but leave it on 24x7 then you should be ashamed of yourself.
I really hate this attitude you people have that you can just do whatever you want, pollute the planet as much as you want, and its the rest of the world that has to suffer just as much, or probably more. *sigh*.
yes
yes
Gentoo already offers parallel init
gentoo already offers this an an option.
Edit the /etc/conf/rc file
change
RC_PARALLEL_STARTUP="no"
to "yes".
Enjoy.
boot fast
can please give me complete path and how to do it.
Thanks a million in advance
nick
remove everything you don't n
remove everything you don't need from your kernel. Move everything you don't need at startup in modules, then don't start any services/daemons you don't need, then you'll boot up in less than 30 seconds.
(i've donne a LFS that boot up in a blink of an eye... and it doesn't use any parallel startup)
Sorry, but unless you have un
Sorry, but unless you have uneeded Adaptec Controllers on your system and built in, then hardly AYNTHING is going to slow you down from a kernel perspective.
My boot process spends about
My boot process spends about 10-15 seconds just booting the kernel and probing/initializing devices. When I played with initng, the actually init process to login screen was faster than the kernel!
Fast boot
With gentoo sources, no parallel fetch, booting takes almost 15 seconds.
how it is possible. that one
how it is possible. that one can able to boot his pc with in 10 secs.
is there any technique then plz sahre it. b/c i also want to adopt it
and want to get rid of those start up things which i have to bear while my pc is booting up.
i use a machspeed viper gt4 s
i use a machspeed viper gt4 socket 939 motherboard and that solved all my problems with xp i never takes long usually 15 sec. and i have quake4, area 51, cold fear, and doom3 demo, and fear install along with nero7 and windvd media creater and printers and trend micro 2006 antivirus with real time virus and spyware and lot of other programs. and if i can boot fast i know you can. this is my 1st machspeed board, but i will definitely buy more !!!!!!
ps. i am system builder gaming and budget so i have used everyone asus, msi, gigabyte, pc chips, msrock, biostar, and soltek, many others this quickest i seen. price great $100 ut gives sli,usb 2.0 ,and sata 1 and 2 3.0gb/s both raid nvidia 4 chipset ultra not regular nforce4. trendmicro 2006 virus free 1 year included and 8 channel sound and overclock detailed features in bios. and watchdog so if you overclock to much set back to last limit that work.
well hope this help
your video game software has
your video game software has nothing to do with your system boot time.
Hybrid Drives
once hybrid drives are comon place (probably by the time they actually start 2.7) perhaps the kernel will fit into it's flash. that should hasten boot time considerably
Erm right for the wrong reasons.
The time it takes to read the kernel from disk does not slow bootup noticeably. It adds maybe a second. It's the eleventy billion files that userspace accesses during bootup, as well as all the driver, network and other protocol timeouts that get serialized.
A hybrid drive will speed up reading many of the files and metadata used in early boot by eliminating seeks and rotational latency. We still need to do something about all the timeouts I mentioned above.
The other thing that hybrid drives might speed up is journal replay and journaling in general, if the journal itself gets shadowed to flash. For this to be reliable and fast, the journal would actually need to live in RAM, and backed up to flash on (perhaps unexpected) power-down. This requires isolating the RAM, flash and their controller, and giving them enough backup juice to allow this emergency transfer to happen.
try http://www-106.ibm.com/de
try http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/linux/library/l-boot.html?ca=dgr-l...
Is there any distributions th
Is there any distributions that has adopted this? If not, why? Linux startup time is a real pain in the ass...
I don't think this will help on a single CPU box
I don't think this approach will help on a single CPU box.
When the machine is coming up, the cpu must be cranking at 100%, so this parallel approach will not help on a single CPU box because the CPU will be a bottleneck.
What about suspending Linux to disk? It is supported in 2.6 AFAIK.
Does it work?
BTW, Windows after it showed the UI, still continues to do some background jobs, so it is not completely usable at this point, whereas Linux finishes ALL bootup jobs after it shows UI.
I can't really agree. Lots of
I can't really agree. Lots of the startup time is spent idling, waiting for things outside the processor to happen (network, printers etc). This time could be worth spending on something useful...
Clarification
This is definatly not true.
Most time is "wasted" through the use of initscripts.
If you want a startup from the moment the kernel is ready to activate userspace to the time you have a "login" prompt or a [gxk]dm login that is about 5 seconds i would advise you to look at "daemontools" from mr. bernstein. there is a similar approach being used in the "runit" tools from a debian developer. That is the system i currently use. it replaces the /sbin/init binary with a minimalistic programm that first sets up the base system (fscking mounting network and so on) till it is safe to start the daemons.. that is done in parallel and without scripts. this step takes about 1-2 seconds.
search google for daemontools or look at cr.yp.to
search google for runit if you own a debian box
My 700Mhz laptop loads slackw
My 700Mhz laptop loads slackware 10 with kde (autologin to my user account) faster than my 2.4ghz workstation loads windows 2000 to the login screen. The windows machine shows a nice graphic that had a progress bar, then it goes to another screen with yet another progress bar, etc. and the linux machine only looks slower because I don't get a graphical screen until its just about ready to let me use it.
I'd still like linux to load faster though. I'm sure that its trying to probe for a bunch of hardware that I don't have. and running scripts for things I don't care.
Is there a simple recipe for loading essentials at boot, showing graphic login, then loading the rest of the stuff? For example, I like to run httpd and mysql on my machine because I do a lot of test/development on my machines, but I'd like to be able to login as those programs load, or those programs can load, say, 1 minute after the boot process is finished. That would give me time to login, and start up my email program and whatever before my machine gets hit again by loading services.
Linux hardly needs to boot
Just use software suspend. System will be up and down with a quickness. Linux hardly needs to be rebooted.
still, at least with ubuntu,
still, at least with ubuntu, it takes up to 30-40s
Suspend-to-RAM
booting is out of fashion anyways. why would anyone reboot his machine?
I use suspend-to-RAM, which works perfect and my laptop is back within a few seconds.
-> Boot times are unimportant as long as your system is stable (and does not have to be rebooted after each security fix like Windows)
Linux boot is IDLE most of the time
The boot process is pretty slow because the scripts tend to be sleepy. The boot process is idle most of the time. The boot process of linux under vmware show on gkrellm that its pretty much in idle.
Here what I did to do a faster boot. It may not work for you
edit /etc/inittab
scroll down to this line:
l5:5:wait:/etc/rc.d/rc 5
and change it to:
l5:5:wait:/etc/rc.d/rc 5 &
of course anything that requests user input during start up will be lost. This will start the GUI while running the init process, which are mostly services, in excutes in background.
When a machine starts up it d
When a machine starts up it does alot of sleeping waiting for hardware to complete it's own initialisation phase etc. You can shave 5 sec from load by making UHCI module initialise in background. Prolly same for EHCI too.
if i remember correctly...
suse does. look at the sysconfig editor. should be something about fastboot.
Re: if i remember correctly...
You remember correctly. And SUSE 9.2 has a few more tricks to improve boot times. It's still not as fast as it could be, but definitely the fastest booting linux distro I've ever had.
You did not mean that
You posted on the 18th of October, about 2 weeks before SuSE 9.2 became available. I bought it this week and installed it last night.
'Slow' is no longer the word to use when describing booting (SuSE 9.1 was slow), try 'turgid', 'glacial' or whatever. I have not got around to timing the boot process yet, but would guess at somewhere between 5 and 10 minutes. 9.1 took something like 3-4 minutes and *that* was a lot worse than previous levels.
Hardware is: Via C3/866 with 768MB Memory. Several partitions spread over two IDE discs (hda and hdd). The previous 'shutdown' was clean.
The parts that look really awful are:
- mounting Reiserfs partitions
- loading the modules needed.
both processes take minutes.
I am considering converting various partitions to XFS from Reiser to see if that speeds things up.
btw. I found this post using google, I was trying to find out if someone else was in the same mess.
You can expect to skip the re
You can expect to skip the reiserfs mount penalty. That single thing is indeed rather annoying as it can spend 5-10 seconds mounting a modest filesystem.
Speed of mounting reiserfs
Speed of mounting reiserfs has improved much since 2.6.20.
Recompile the kernel with only the needed drivers cut 10 sec.
I was in the same situation, the loading of modules took decades... so I recompiled the kernel with only the drivers for my hardware (only for advanced/experts users).
It is time to deselect all things that are not needed and test the new kernel, seeing with dmesg if all is detected as with the stock kernel of your distro.
I use kubuntu, and there are a lot of howtos to recompile your own kernel, and compiling the kernel for your processor adds a plus of speed. This can help the thing, and adding initNG to the proccess helps much more.
Linux Startup Time Complaints?
Dude, my box is up in like 30 to 45 seconds (I've never counted). The longest thing to load is the hotswap hardware driver, which is like 8 seconds at most. Have you ever used that one operating system out there? Something-or-other XP? It takes like 5 minutes to boot, then when you log in it takes another 3 to stop grinding the hard drive and loading all the spyware/adware that you inevitably have installed. Ever try NT?, same thing. Anyway, enough bashing on crappy OS's. Dude, if your machine is taking a long time to start up, then something is clearly wrong. Stop loading so much overhead junk!
Linux Startup Time Complaints?
My old debian and my new kubuntu hoary's, both with default desktop setups are something like 2 to 3 times slower than my default configuration of XP (>1.5 minutes Linux vs 30-40seconds XP). Don't say the problem/difference is not there. INIT like startup is singlethread and very inefficient, with lots of sleeps within the scripts. The ideal would be to load things just when we need then and load independent 'dependencies' in paralel when possible. Sample, kdm requires to start X that requires graphic chip modules, mouse support, keyboard, etc... things get up as soon as dependencies are met. Has someone been working in something like this already?
rewrite your init scripts
Any gains from a parrallel boot proccess will be small, not to mention a pain to setup properly, to really increase boot times rewrite your init scripts to bypass language checks, and checks for hardware you don't have, (I know mandrake checks for a brail terminal), distros init scripts are made to startup a wide veriaty of systems configurations, and have tons of error checks. custom making one for your system setup will do much more for boot times then anything else.
For gentoo...
You change one variable from "no" to "yes", making startup noticably faster. No need to rewrite init scripts since it only loads what you tell it to.
Many services can be loaded while waiting for others to load.
Time for me to test my boot time (roughly)...
(also I can't wait until I can try linux bios)
Here are some rough results, how does this compare to others?
Rough times (eyeballed from my watch):
Shutdown: ~20 seconds (starting from gdm).
Boot: ~24 seconds (from grub's menu to gdm - including nvidia splash screen).
List of major services (probably not to many compared to most people):
cupsd metalog eth0 netmount ntp-client sshd vcron xdm
Computer: P4 2.4Ghz, 1Gb DDR ram, GeForce FX 5200, 80 Gb ide hdd.
Is that good or bad compared to anyone else?
Well, my rather old computer
Well, my rather old computer takes most time starting up the bios, so only after 30 seconds or more I'm in Grub. After that it takes 15 to 20 seconds to be in console, so booting Linux is fast enough, it's the bios that's slow for me. Starting X takes only some seconds, but I use Fluxbox. Ldconfig takes a few seconds which could be saved by disabling it, but it's really not worth it.
PIII 600 Mhz, 256 sdram, 6 gig 5200 rpm ide hd.
That's not too old.
For the most part, processor speed doesn't matter too much (but it all depends on what you are loading, a system with server services will go a lot slower on a slow box). Still on a home setup, it generally makes little difference (~5 secs? not including system post, old pentiums with 64 or less ram perhaps).
If you want a speedier bios bootup, I suggest your next computer use LinuxBios if possible, and I'm hoping it will be. Still depending on the Bios, if it has a 'Quick Post' option, use it; unfortunately many BIOS's are very featureless (except my ol' buddy award [maybe others, but not many.]).
No, not too old, but computer
No, not too old, but computers seem to be old quicky. The average age of the parts is old enough though (monitor from 1996 and it's stuffed in a 286 case). Linuxbios is nice, but not really worth it, because of the lack of features and because newer computers boot fast enough anyway.
In the end it doesn't matter that your pc boots in 3 seconds if you must wait 10 seconds before your browser starts.
hmmm...
Personally I think LinuxBios could be very cool, in the future, since it more or less hands off starting the computer to the linux kernel, which imho is a very good idea. Unfortunately it needs more support; I'm not sure what you mean by features, specifically, but I would imagine if it hands off doing most of the bios functions to the linux kernel, a lot of features could be created. If I ever feel like building a 'carputer' I'll definitely want linuxbios, but that's off topic.
I also don't see why a p3 600 would go through bios faster than the newest computer of today (mostly it seems to depend on the bios, I have on comp that always checks the ram - that's annoying).
286 case wow? My old 286 case is about the size of one of those slimline cases, not much can be done with that with regular components (you can always buy a $1 switch at some place like RadioShack and put all the components in a cardboard box if you really want to "slum it").
It would be very cool if the
It would be very cool if the mobo manufacturers would support bioslinux. By features I mean that I am able to control voltage and multiplier settings (I need to underclock that p3 otherwise it's unstable).
Well, I noticed that my p3 is very slow at booting compared with other, newer pcs. Those take only a few seconds in the bios bootup.
I needed a case, it was laying around and it fit, ok?
Re: It would be very cool if the
I have a P3/600 that boots like lightening. It's an old Dell L600r, and it takes a few seconds only from power on to grub. To be honest I have no clue what particular settings did that, but I will muck around when i come back from work.
Specs: gentoo 2004.3, vanilli
Specs: gentoo 2004.3, vanillia 2.6.9 "hand" compiled, services: metalog, eth0, dhcp, in runmode level 3(text), "parrallel" startup services on, a P4 3 ghz HT(SMP kernel), 1 gig ram, dell laptop
~22 sec; from grub to login prompt
~20 sec; shutdown prompt to no power
This is a dual boot laptop, the other OS being XP pro, which has a similair startup time, but about a 10 sec shutdown time.
my results
On my AMD K7 500MHz/256RAM/12Go HDD/Asus mobo/nv X driver/slack 10, it takes:
- from swithc on to GRUB: 11s (BIOS time)
- from GRUB to KDM: 58s, but including:
* ldconfig
* hotplug script parse
* dhclient to connect to my ISP
- from KDM to shutdown: 14s
Didn't looked at KDE time. What seems to be slow for me is ldconfig, hotplug, dhclient and kdm.
Which gentoo variable is that
Which gentoo variable is that?
I think it's called RC_STARTU
I think it's called RC_STARTUP_PARALLEL or something similar in yout /etc/conf.d/rc file.
Startup time
Causes for delays in boot:
The rest really amounts to userland problems rather than kernel delays. On a system where you store an uncompressed kernel-image in flash or similar you can easily boot to userland in half a second with a nicely tuned kernel. Less with a bit of effort.
start order
GUI login manager (kdm/xdm) is started last by default, you can
move its startup link to rcS.d, just after critical ones.
Actual order depends on your system, usually you can start xdm/kdm even before modutils.
I'm using such setup on my Debian desktop.
move its startup link to rcS.d
Thats interesting, Can I do a similar thing with the firewall script?
I have a fear that the ports are open for too long during boot time.
This is the first time I've seen the mention of changing rc*.d configurations.
Also, I'm a newb at Kernel things, usually using *.rpm for upgrading the Kernel.
Sure
No problem. Use a shell script as init. Don't use the distro crap that does everything and then some on every boot...
I just start the necessary gettys and that's it. My startup is just a few seconds of kernel messages scrolling by. Then when I want to start X11 and KDE, that's not very fast.
Wow
All this talk about startup times....why do you ever have to reboot your linux machine?! Other than on my laptop, I could care less if it took 5 minutes to boot my machine, because it's so rare that I ever have to reboot.
saving energy, thats why you insensitive clod
because, unlike those who live in the continent of north america, south of canada and north of mexico, the rest of the world actually does care about how much pollution and green house gases get produced.
If you only use your pc 8 hours a day but leave it on 24x7 then you should be ashamed of yourself.
I really hate this attitude you people have that you can just do whatever you want, pollute the planet as much as you want, and its the rest of the world that has to suffer just as much, or probably more. *sigh*.