Greetings,
I was just wondering what it is that FreeBSD does that makes it take so long
to boot. Booting into Ubuntu minimal or my own custom Linux distro, literally
takes 0.5-2 seconds to boot up to shell, where FreeBSD takes about 10-20
seconds. I'm not sure if anything could be parallelized
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 09:10:04AM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
>
> mostly kernel time.
> >Note: This isn't really an issue, moreso a curiosity.
>
> true. system that never crash are not often booted
> ...
I'd rather not get into a long discussion about this, but the above
reflects a perce
In message , Wojci
ech Puchar writes:
One of the major slowdowns is that we do all the device drivers
serially & synchronously.
--
Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
p...@freebsd.org | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribut
On Tue, 2012-06-12 at 23:45 +0300, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 08:51:34AM -0600, Ian Lepore wrote:
> > On Sat, 2012-06-09 at 22:45 +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
> > > >
> > > > First, all memory allocated by UMA and consequently malloc(9) is
> > > > wired. In other words, a
On Wed, 2012-06-13 at 09:10 +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
> > Greetings,
> >
> > I was just wondering what it is that FreeBSD does that makes it take so
> > long
> > to boot. Booting into Ubuntu minimal or my own custom Linux distro,
> > literally
> > takes 0.5-2 seconds to boot up to shell, wh
on 09/06/2012 19:17 Doug Barton said the following:
> If this were a problem we didn't already have a solution for, I'd be
> much more interested in what you're proposing.
I wonder if you were in the same mindset when you worked on service(8).
This is not to doubt service(8) usefulness, of course.
On 06/12/12 18:00, Richard Yao wrote:
On 06/11/12 18:51, Garrett Cooper wrote:
On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 3:21 PM, Brandon Falk wrote:
Greetings,
I was just wondering what it is that FreeBSD does that makes it take so long
to boot. Booting into Ubuntu minimal or my own custom Linux distro,
liter
On Tuesday, June 12, 2012 8:01:00 pm Adrian Chadd wrote:
> hi,
>
> You don't need to change the FreeBSD culture. We'd love to do an 8.4
> release. And an 8.5 release, and 8.6 release, etc. The problem is one
> of resources and time, not of culture/desire.
I disagree. The pace of X.0 releases is
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 5:53 AM, John Baldwin wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 12, 2012 8:01:00 pm Adrian Chadd wrote:
>> hi,
>>
>> You don't need to change the FreeBSD culture. We'd love to do an 8.4
>> release. And an 8.5 release, and 8.6 release, etc. The problem is one
>> of resources and time, not o
On 13 June 2012 05:53, John Baldwin wrote:
>> You don't need to change the FreeBSD culture. We'd love to do an 8.4
>> release. And an 8.5 release, and 8.6 release, etc. The problem is one
>> of resources and time, not of culture/desire.
>
> I disagree. The pace of X.0 releases is a deliberate ch
On 6/13/2012 10:19 AM, Nathan Whitehorn wrote:
On 06/12/12 18:00, Richard Yao wrote:
On 06/11/12 18:51, Garrett Cooper wrote:
On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 3:21 PM, Brandon
Falk wrote:
Greetings,
I was just wondering what it is that FreeBSD does that makes it
take so long
to boot. Booting into U
On Wednesday, June 13, 2012 11:52:28 am Adrian Chadd wrote:
> On 13 June 2012 05:53, John Baldwin wrote:
>
> >> You don't need to change the FreeBSD culture. We'd love to do an 8.4
> >> release. And an 8.5 release, and 8.6 release, etc. The problem is one
> >> of resources and time, not of cultur
Hey, I'm a Desktop User and I wish FreeBSD v8.3 worked for me. I can't get a
Dialup Internet Connection without setting up a complicated script. And my
Porn Videos crash halfway through.
Yours frustratedly: Frank Mitchell
On Wednesday 13 June 2012 00:08:08 Jerry McAllister wrote:
>
> Well, 8.3
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 07:14:09AM -0600, Ian Lepore wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-06-12 at 23:45 +0300, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 08:51:34AM -0600, Ian Lepore wrote:
> > > On Sat, 2012-06-09 at 22:45 +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > First, all memory allocated
I'll share my 2 cents here, as someone who maintains a decent sided
FreeBSD install.
1. FreeBSD needs to make end users more comfortable with using a
Dot-Ohh release; and at the time of the dot-ohh release
a timeline for the next point releases should be made. *
2. Having three supported releases
On 06/13/12 13:22, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 07:14:09AM -0600, Ian Lepore wrote:
On Tue, 2012-06-12 at 23:45 +0300, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 08:51:34AM -0600, Ian Lepore wrote:
On Sat, 2012-06-09 at 22:45 +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
First,
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 07:14:09AM -0600, Ian Lepore wrote:
> http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arm/2012-January/003288.html
The map_object.c patch is step in the almost right direction, I wanted
to remove the static page-sized buffer from get_elf_header for long time.
It works because rt
On Wednesday 13 June 2012 15:21:29 Ian Lepore wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-06-13 at 09:10 +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
> > > Greetings,
> > >
> > > I was just wondering what it is that FreeBSD does that makes it take so
> > > long to boot. Booting into Ubuntu minimal or my own custom Linux
> > > distro,
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 2:12 PM, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 07:14:09AM -0600, Ian Lepore wrote:
> > http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arm/2012-January/003288.html
>
> The map_object.c patch is step in the almost right direction, I wanted
> to remove the static pa
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 03:17:56PM -0500, Alan Cox wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 2:12 PM, Konstantin Belousov
> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 07:14:09AM -0600, Ian Lepore wrote:
> > > http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arm/2012-January/003288.html
> >
> > The map_object.c patch
On 13 June 2012 12:55, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
> On Wednesday 13 June 2012 15:21:29 Ian Lepore wrote:
>> On Wed, 2012-06-13 at 09:10 +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
>> > > Greetings,
>> > >
>> > > I was just wondering what it is that FreeBSD does that makes it take so
>> > > long to boot. Booting
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 10:58 PM, Eitan Adler wrote:
> On 13 June 2012 12:55, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
> > On Wednesday 13 June 2012 15:21:29 Ian Lepore wrote:
> >> On Wed, 2012-06-13 at 09:10 +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
> >> > > Greetings,
> >> > >
> >> > > I was just wondering what it is t
The OpenRC is sysvinit compatible, but it has few of sysvinit's flaws.
It has named runlevels, the presence of an init script does not cause it
to start and it is in my opinion a joy to use.
I suggest that you try OpenRC before drawing conclusions. You can
install Gentoo FreeBSD in a jail. There a
On 13 June 2012 14:16, claudiu vasadi wrote:
> If you simplky do "sysctl -d hw.usb.no_boot_wait" you will see the
> explanation ;)
No, you see a one liner that only explains things if you already
understand what is going on:
hw.usb.no_boot_wait: No USB device enumerate waiting at boot.
Does set
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 8:35 PM, Richard Yao wrote:
> The OpenRC is sysvinit compatible, but it has few of sysvinit's flaws.
> It has named runlevels, the presence of an init script does not cause it
> to start and it is in my opinion a joy to use.
>
> I suggest that you try OpenRC before drawing
On 13-6-2012 23:16, claudiu vasadi wrote:
>
> If you simplky do "sysctl -d hw.usb.no_boot_wait" you will see the
> explanation ;)
Probably why Eitan asked as that description:
a) means nothing to people unfamiliar with device enumerations
b) does not point to a manual page that explains how USB
On 13 Jun 2012, at 19:27, John Baldwin wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 13, 2012 11:52:28 am Adrian Chadd wrote:
>> On 13 June 2012 05:53, John Baldwin wrote:
>>
You don't need to change the FreeBSD culture. We'd love to do an 8.4
release. And an 8.5 release, and 8.6 release, etc. The pro
On Tue, 12 Jun 2012, Warren Block wrote:
On Tue, 12 Jun 2012, Richard Yao wrote:
Gentoo FreeBSD shares OpenRC with Gentoo Linux. OpenRC is a BSD 2-clause
licensed System V init system replacement that supports parallel boot.
Its boot performance is competitive with systemd and Ubuntu's upstart
On 06/13/2012 06:50 AM, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> on 09/06/2012 19:17 Doug Barton said the following:
>> If this were a problem we didn't already have a solution for, I'd be
>> much more interested in what you're proposing.
>
> I wonder if you were in the same mindset when you worked on service(8).
>
Mark Saad wrote:
> I'll share my 2 cents here, as someone who maintains a decent sided
> FreeBSD install.
>
> 1. FreeBSD needs to make end users more comfortable with using a
> Dot-Ohh release; and at the time of the dot-ohh release
> a timeline for the next point releases should be made. *
>
> 2
On 6/13/12 2:16 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> In message ,
> Wojci
> ech Puchar writes:
>
> One of the major slowdowns is that we do all the device drivers
> serially & synchronously.
Yes definitely.
I have been looking into how to potentially defer or parallelize
device_attach'es. Defer is tur
On 12-6-2012 0:51, Garrett Cooper wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 3:21 PM, Brandon Falk wrote:
>> Greetings,
>>
>> I was just wondering what it is that FreeBSD does that makes it take so long
>> to boot. Booting into Ubuntu minimal or my own custom Linux distro,
>> literally takes 0.5-2 seconds t
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Russell Cattelan wrote:
> On 6/13/12 2:16 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> > In message ,
> Wojci
> > ech Puchar writes:
> >
> > One of the major slowdowns is that we do all the device drivers
> > serially & synchronously.
> Yes definitely.
>
> I have been looking in
On 2012-06-13 14:18, Eitan Adler wrote:
On 13 June 2012 14:16, claudiu vasadi wrote:
If you simplky do "sysctl -d hw.usb.no_boot_wait" you will see the
explanation ;)
No, you see a one liner that only explains things if you already
understand what is going on:
I believe it pertains to mount
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 05/26/12 08:06, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
> is it possible. suppose i have 1GB file with my data and 100 1
> megabyte parts of it is no longer needed. i could reorganize that
> file to take 900MB or... can i call some system function to "punch"
> hol
Realized my earlier related post was a bit misplaced in questions@.
So I just refer to it here by link, ok then that is all.
http://docs.freebsd.org/cgi/getmsg.cgi?fetch=968504+0+current/freebsd-questions
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 08:50:24AM -0700, Garrett Cooper wrote:
> The only way that this would really work is if there were dedicated
> sustaining engineers working on actively backporting code, testing it,
> committing it, etc.
I'm going to agree with Garrett here. IMHO we've reached (or surpass
On 13 June 2012 21:26, Mark Linimon wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 08:50:24AM -0700, Garrett Cooper wrote:
>> The only way that this would really work is if there were dedicated
>> sustaining engineers working on actively backporting code, testing it,
>> committing it, etc.
>
> I'm going to agre
file to take 900MB or... can i call some system function to "punch"
holes?
I think you can only truncate the file at this time, pretty much like
brk() works for memory.
BAD. suppose i keep windoze VM image on filesystem which takes 10GB but
uses 5GB.
i could write simple program to find ou
Friends,
I am looking at the upcoming release schedule, and I only see 9.1 listed -
can anyone confirm or deny 8.4 ?
does it matter. cvsup RELENG_8 and you see updates are done constantly.
just sometime somebody decide to change number :)
___
freebsd
On Wednesday 13 June 2012 23:35:17 Mel Flynn wrote:
> On 13-6-2012 23:16, claudiu vasadi wrote:
> > If you simplky do "sysctl -d hw.usb.no_boot_wait" you will see the
> > explanation ;)
>
> Probably why Eitan asked as that description:
> a) means nothing to people unfamiliar with device enumeratio
On 13 June 2012 22:13, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
> It's not dangerous. It only means that you can't boot off a USB disk for
> example, because the USB stack will then not wait for the BOOT device at
> mount-root time, if you set this options.
This is what I expected, but it should be documented
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 8:30 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> On 13 June 2012 21:26, Mark Linimon wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 08:50:24AM -0700, Garrett Cooper wrote:
>>> The only way that this would really work is if there were dedicated
>>> sustaining engineers working on actively backporting cod
On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 07:13:23AM +0200, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
> On Wednesday 13 June 2012 23:35:17 Mel Flynn wrote:
> > On 13-6-2012 23:16, claudiu vasadi wrote:
> > > If you simplky do "sysctl -d hw.usb.no_boot_wait" you will see the
> > > explanation ;)
> >
> > Probably why Eitan asked as
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 10:25 PM, Royce Williams
wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 8:30 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
>> On 13 June 2012 21:26, Mark Linimon wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 08:50:24AM -0700, Garrett Cooper wrote:
The only way that this would really work is if there were dedicate
Resending to list, forgot to hit reply-all.
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 10:06 PM, Garrett Cooper wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 10:25 PM, Royce Williams
> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 8:30 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
>>> On 13 June 2012 21:26, Mark Linimon wrote:
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 08
46 matches
Mail list logo
