Avery Pennarun writes:
> What's wrong with priority levels? Programs start up in alphabetical order.
> I wish they would die in reverse-alphabetical order (then we could have
> S99xdm and K99kdm, which would make the file-rc package look nicer) but
> priority levels do exactly what you want -
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Robert Woodcock) wrote on 10.06.98 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> * /etc/init.d/rc is modified to call a program that determines the order
> the scripts should be run in, on the fly. I figure this won't be much
> of a speed hit. Slrn can thread thousands of messages per second a
> Parallelized booting. What this means is we run multiple bootup scripts
> simultaneously. It's a *lot* faster on mid-to-higher-end machines, even
> with just one CPU - it'd be wickedly fast with SMP.
I like it.
This sounds like a job for make (which can run things in parallel)
It shouldn't be
On Wed, Jun 10, 1998 at 07:57:18PM -0700, Robert Woodcock wrote:
> Parallelized booting. What this means is we run multiple bootup scripts
> simultaneously. It's a *lot* faster on mid-to-higher-end machines, even
> with just one CPU - it'd be wickedly fast with SMP.
>
> "Hey wait a second that wo
Hello, I have an idea (ok, maybe not an original idea, but bear with me :)
It involves the sysvinit (/etc/init.d/rcS and a lotta other stuff) and
dpkg packages. (update-rc.d)
Parallelized booting. What this means is we run multiple bootup scripts
simultaneously. It's a *lot* faster on mid-to-hig
5 matches
Mail list logo
