On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 6:22 PM, Sebastian Günther <a...@teageek.de> wrote: > * Felipe Contreras (felipe.contre...@gmail.com) [22.08.12 02:22]: >> Funny that you say "around the same time", when it's clearly less than >> 6 seconds, so it's 15% slower, but that's the second instance of kdm. >> The first instance starts at 2s in 1000 hz, and 4s in 300 hz, so >> there's *clearly* a big difference. > > So it's only needs twice the time with only on third of the ticks? Well > that is awesome... Yeah to systemd! > > Anyway we are talking about 2 seconds... > compared to time you wasted for a lot of people: It would have been > better you had just saved all the delaying seconds for 100 boots and got > a cup of coffee as normal users do when they boot their computer....
In fact, the first kdm in the graphs is kdm.service unit that's being loaded by systemd. The real kdm is started after every other dependency is satisfied, around 6 or 7 seconds after boot. I don't have initscripts anymore to make a comparison, but the time to get to kdm was almost double the current time. -- A: Because it obfuscates the reading. Q: Why is top posting so bad? For more information, please read: http://idallen.com/topposting.html ------------------------------------------- Denis A. Altoe Falqueto Linux user #524555 -------------------------------------------
