hardware agnostic?

[Derek Broughton]

Muzer wrote:

> Derek Broughton wrote:
>> Rashkae wrote:
>>
>>   
>>> Derek Broughton wrote:
>>>
>>>     
>>>> I'm not convinced of that - and Scott's info about what he's doing
>>>> suggests
>>>> otherwise.  hot-plugging everything as late as possible shortens the
>>>> boot time.
>>>>       
>>> You would be shocked at how fast some of my old servers for which I
>>> compiled kernels boot... We're talking about hardware over 10 years old
>>> and it puts any modern desktop with ubuntu installed to shame.  System
>>> boots and is at a log in prompt before my desktop has even finished with
>>> intitramfs.
>>>     
>>
>> I wouldn't be _shocked_, but I mean that Scott's plans, heavily dependent
>> on udev, involve simply _not_ loading any software that is not required
>> to get
>> X up and running.  Everything's geared to making X start as fast as
>> possible.  So while you might be able to achieve the same thing by
>> compiling a kernel for specific hardware, you can make it _look_ as if
>> everything is loaded just as fast by waiting for the really intensive
>> applications to
>> settle down before you load other things.  I guess I really wasn't "not
>> convinced" that you could speed up boot by compiling the kernel, but that
>> I wasn't convinced it was either the only, or necessarily even the best,
>> way.
>>   
>>> Alas, I have discovered with age and wisdom, after having gone through
>>> "look how leet my fast booting linux boxes are" phase, that having
>>> systems (and backps thereof) which can be ported to any hardware
>>> 'agnosticly' on a moments notice trumps boot time.
>>>     
>>
>> LOL.  Even on my development system, there's much to be said for running
>> certain services as VMs - for exactly the same reason.
>>   
> He says "end of bootup" is when both CPU and I/O is idle.

Who?  Scott?  I've seen him say "when you have a working desktop" - and 
whether or not that's strictly the "end of boot", it'll probably do for most 
people.

-- 
derek