On 9/12/2012 4:43 AM, Ian Lepore wrote: > On Tue, 2012-09-11 at 17:07 -0700, David O'Brien wrote: >> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 04:22:24PM -0700, Xin Li wrote: >>> Please consider using sha512... >> >> What is the performance (boot time) impact on low-end MIPS and ARM >> systems? >> >> I'm all for sha512, but don't want to be shot with a machine gun (vs. >> simple pistol). >> > > For the embedded systems I take care of, the performance problem on > low-end systems is likely to be solved by ignoring all of this angels > dancing on a pin stuff and supplying an alternate kickstart mechanism > appropriate to the way the system is used (which almost surely won't be > in any national security datacenter). > > I can assure you that neither shaXXX nor gzip nor anything else that > eats that many cycles will be involved. :) > > I just hope one of things coming out of all this is a reasonable > mechanism for supplying alternate kickstart data.
I haven't yet heard any feedback on my suggestion to have one set of default "safe" commands that are low-impact enough for embedded systems, and another set to be added by default to more standard systems. Do you think that this would address your concerns Ian? Doug _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-rc To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
