Le jeu 30/10/2003 à 12:01, Jos Hulzink a écrit : > On Thu, 30 Oct 2003, Vedran Ljubovic wrote: > > Here are some thinkings: > > > > - Harddrake should *not* be disabled by default. If > > one changes some piece of hardware (they'll probably > > do that while their system is off :) strange things > > may happen to their system. You may not change your > > hardware often, but I for example have my case on > > Removing harddrake might be sensible for laptops and > > computers that are known to be black-boxes (servers, > > non tech-savvy users; I'd like to make that call > > myself). > > My point is that someone who changes hardware knows what he is doing, and > pressing "H" at boot time to run harddrake is only a small step after > hacking your hardware.
you're wrong. 1°/ linux users since 5 years, cooker user since 3 years, sysadmin and i don't even know that pressing H was launching harddrake ... Where this feature is writed and easily accessible to someone who don't even try to find it ? 2°/ people changing hardware don't know what they do, especially on linux. Normally if you change your hardware ( put USB/Firewire devices, or add a CDROM/CDRWM ), you expect it should work automatically ( how many people praise XP when it was able to detect and configure alone their hardware when XP had the correct drive ? of course when something was wrong ... ). Even for graphic card/monitor we all waiting for the day when we will be able to switch the graphic card and that linux/mdk will detect this at boot and simply automatically configure it, etc ... > 95% of the users will never change hardware, or it > must be an usb stick, which should not heb handled by harddrake, for > harddrake only detects at boot time. (My system comes with /dev/sda1 not > found while mounting filesystems for I happened to have an USB stick in my > machine during the install of 9.2. Have been too lazy to fix it yet.) or a USB printer, or a new USB keyboard/mouse to replace your PS/2 keyboard/mouse, a USB HD, an USB camera, ... > > and other such examples. That's 18 seconds or more > > than 20% of overall boot-up time. I don't think > > parallelization can bring that much benefit. > > Also consider splitting harddrake in part that is > > needed to run X (detecting video card, monitor and > > mouse) and the rest that runs after the desktop is up. > > It can even show a nice GUI for new hardware :) What > > else can be delayed after the GUI is up? > > Harddrake isn't _THAT_ slow, splitting it up would cause more overhead. > > /me wonders if XFree can be stripped. 99 % of the users will never use the > remote connect features of X. I'm not an X expert, are the remote connect > features and such loaded when X starts ? the network support in XFree doesn't slow XFree startup. culprits here are the toolkits, the De ( gnome/KDE ) and ldd. the network support may slow XFree during usage ( i.e not everything is optimized for direct access, but that's a wrong debate ) --- Faites-vous des amis prompts a vous censurer. -- Nicolas Boileau, Satires
