On 7/7/07, Ian Murdock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Alberto Ruiz wrote: > > 2007/7/5, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>: > > SMF is not overkill for indiana. > > > > it might be overkill to instantiate quite the number of SMF services > > that > > a full-blown solaris installation does at first-boot, but SMF itself is > > incredibly useful. ;) > > > > I think that a lot of people find SMF frustrating because they think > > it's slow due to the prohibitive number of services that Solaris and > > Solaris Express boot by default. Maybe we should try to keep as less as > > possible services for Indiana? Does that makes sense? > > Is this something we should add to the list, i.e., investigate > the services started at boot time to determine which aren't > necessary and can be removed? I haven't noticed a problem > with speed here aside from the first boot (which does take an > inordinately long time--what on earth is it doing exactly?). >
As my sketchy knowledge of this goes, the various system services (around 150 odd in the current builds of SX) are parsed to look for their dependencies, and a dependency tree is created. The next boot onwards SMF will restart independent services in parallel. Its this that takes the long time. Anil _______________________________________________ indiana-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/indiana-discuss
