FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 01-05-2008, 03:20 PM
Tanguy Eric
 
Default Init : someone could comment this ?

I just find this
http://www.pardus.org.tr/eng/projeler/comar/SpeedingUpLinuxWithPardus.html maybe it's known but someone could comment this because it seems to gain init time.

Eric


--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 01-05-2008, 11:16 PM
Casey Dahlin
 
Default Init : someone could comment this ?

Tanguy Eric wrote:

I just find this
http://www.pardus.org.tr/eng/projeler/comar/SpeedingUpLinuxWithPardus.html maybe it's known but someone could comment this because it seems to gain init time.

Eric



There is work being done in this area for Fedora as well. I've been
working on a parallel booting system for us that also will provide dbus
notifications for the starting of various services. (Hopefully I'll be
leading a hackfest at FUDCon in a few days to get a few more eyes and
hands on the code).


We have had discussions on this in the past and had similarly decided
not to replace the init daemon. We also decided that we wanted to retain
compatibility with conventional sysvinit scripts.


As for rewriting some of the scripts themselves in a non-bash language,
there may be an advantage. I don't know if I like python in particular
for this roll (maybe something like Haskell that has proven to be light
and quick as well as nicer to deal with) but python is very entrenched
in Fedora, and I believe RPM/YUM still depends on it, so there's a low
cost to using it. Bash does a lot by running other programs, and that is
a lot of extra IO.


Those are what I see to be the points in the article that are relevant
to Fedora. The other elements are interesting, but not directly related
to the general aspect of improving boot speed.


--CJD

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 01-05-2008, 11:46 PM
"Jonathan Underwood"
 
Default Init : someone could comment this ?

On 06/01/2008, Casey Dahlin <cjdahlin@ncsu.edu> wrote:
> There is work being done in this area for Fedora as well. I've been
> working on a parallel booting system for us that also will provide dbus
> notifications for the starting of various services. (Hopefully I'll be
> leading a hackfest at FUDCon in a few days to get a few more eyes and
> hands on the code).
>

Other than compatability with sysvinit scripts, why was upstart dismissed?

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 01-06-2008, 02:26 AM
Casey Dahlin
 
Default Init : someone could comment this ?

Jonathan Underwood wrote:

On 06/01/2008, Casey Dahlin <cjdahlin@ncsu.edu> wrote:


There is work being done in this area for Fedora as well. I've been
working on a parallel booting system for us that also will provide dbus
notifications for the starting of various services. (Hopefully I'll be
leading a hackfest at FUDCon in a few days to get a few more eyes and
hands on the code).




Other than compatability with sysvinit scripts, why was upstart dismissed?


Many options were looked at during the last iteration of this
discussion, and by my understanding prcsys was the one that won out. See
here:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FCNewInit/RC?highlight=%28fcnewinit%29
There's a few issues with prcsys internally that make it very difficult
to add the features we want (dbus etc), as well as some not-so-trivial
implementation issues (use of pthreads in a circumstance under which
they were a very poor choice), so Harald Hoyer and myself decided that a
rewrite was in order, so I went ahead and started working on a new app
(which I have titled 'rrn') which is now near feature parity with
prcsys. My academic schedule has meant I haven't had enough of it done
to be worth showing to anyone until very recently, so I've not been
talking too much about it here, but now that its starting to come
together, I'd love to start the discussion up again (and of course you
can all tell me I'm crazy and to take my little program and go home .


--CJD

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 01-06-2008, 04:29 AM
"Yaakov Nemoy"
 
Default Init : someone could comment this ?

On Jan 5, 2008 7:16 PM, Casey Dahlin <cjdahlin@ncsu.edu> wrote:
> there may be an advantage. I don't know if I like python in particular
> for this roll (maybe something like Haskell that has proven to be light
> and quick as well as nicer to deal with) but python is very entrenched

+1 million

I'm actually very interested.

-Yaakov

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 01-06-2008, 05:17 AM
Casey Dahlin
 
Default Init : someone could comment this ?

Yaakov Nemoy wrote:

On Jan 5, 2008 7:16 PM, Casey Dahlin <cjdahlin@ncsu.edu> wrote:


there may be an advantage. I don't know if I like python in particular
for this roll (maybe something like Haskell that has proven to be light
and quick as well as nicer to deal with) but python is very entrenched



+1 million

I'm actually very interested.

-Yaakov


Heh. Haskell is still on my "need to learn" list. A recent glance at the
programming language shootout bumped it up a bit


Rewriting a few init scripts or adding LSB headers could be part of the
hackfest.


On that note, is there a packaging requirement now that any new init
scripts must have LSB headers? Should there be?


--CJD

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 01-06-2008, 05:20 AM
Dimi Paun
 
Default Init : someone could comment this ?

On Sat, 2008-01-05 at 19:16 -0500, Casey Dahlin wrote:
> As for rewriting some of the scripts themselves in a non-bash
> language, there may be an advantage. I don't know if I like python in
> particular for this roll (maybe something like Haskell that has proven
> to be light and quick as well as nicer to deal with) but python is

Oh please, I hope you're not being serious! I mean Haskell is cool
and all, but it is rather obscure for the vast majority of people,
and the last thing we need is yet another strange language mixed in
such a critical part of the system.

The entire point of having a scripting language in the init scripts
is for the admins to have a chance of making small adjustments easily.
If we use Haskell, we lose 99.99% of the population right there.
We might as well just code them in C: that would provide for faster
start-up AND it will be accessible to most people.

--
Dimi Paun <dimi@lattica.com>
Lattica, Inc.

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 01-06-2008, 05:22 AM
Casey Dahlin
 
Default Init : someone could comment this ?

Dimi Paun wrote:

On Sat, 2008-01-05 at 19:16 -0500, Casey Dahlin wrote:


As for rewriting some of the scripts themselves in a non-bash
language, there may be an advantage. I don't know if I like python in
particular for this roll (maybe something like Haskell that has proven
to be light and quick as well as nicer to deal with) but python is



Oh please, I hope you're not being serious! I mean Haskell is cool
and all, but it is rather obscure for the vast majority of people,
and the last thing we need is yet another strange language mixed in
such a critical part of the system.

The entire point of having a scripting language in the init scripts
is for the admins to have a chance of making small adjustments easily.
If we use Haskell, we lose 99.99% of the population right there.
We might as well just code them in C: that would provide for faster
start-up AND it will be accessible to most people.



I don't know that I find Haskell to be that obscure, but point taken.

--CJD

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 01-06-2008, 09:36 AM
Enrico Scholz
 
Default Init : someone could comment this ?

Casey Dahlin <cjdahlin@ncsu.edu> writes:

> There is work being done in this area for Fedora as well. I've been
> working on a parallel booting system for us that also will provide
> dbus notifications for the starting of various services.

mmh... does this mean, Fedora will use its own proprietary initsystem
and ignores the existing ones (initng, upstart)?


> As for rewriting some of the scripts themselves in a non-bash
> language,

An initsystem which requires depbloat like python or perl is completely
unacceptably.


Enrico

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 01-06-2008, 09:50 AM
Nicolas Mailhot
 
Default Init : someone could comment this ?

Le samedi 05 janvier 2008 * 22:26 -0500, Casey Dahlin a écrit :

> There's a few issues with prcsys internally that make it very difficult
> to add the features we want (dbus etc), as well as some not-so-trivial
> implementation issues (use of pthreads in a circumstance under which
> they were a very poor choice), so Harald Hoyer and myself decided that a
> rewrite was in order, so I went ahead and started working on a new app
> (which I have titled 'rrn') which is now near feature parity with
> prcsys.

It would be very nice if the next-gen init system didn't limit itself to
the system init part but also covered session init steps. The desktop
team is dead-set against system-wide daemons¹, and as a result we've
seen a flourishing of in-session "helpers", all launched in a
more-or-less hackish, racish and unsatisfactory way:
– when the state of the art for PA is to pretend it's ESD to be
launched, there are clearly huge problems in our session init handling.
– sometimes you do a ps and see stray session daemons remaining alive
hours after session close
– it's not uncommon for GNOME to start doing things before initialising
its settings, causing users to wonder why the theme or fonts change 3s
after starting an app
– etc

Session init and system init seem very similar problems to me, and if we
ever want to go early login like windows, we'll need to coordinate
session init steps with the system init steps not finished yet. Of
course there are complications (you need to merge system presets and
user preferences, take the kind of login² and DE into account) but the
similarities should far outweight the differences.

Regards,

¹ with some good and a lot of bad (IMHO) reasons
² is it so different from classical system init levels?

--
Nicolas Mailhot
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 05:08 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org