Re: And now for something completely different... etch!
On Sunday 12 June 2005 19:54, Cesar Martinez Izquierdo <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> El Domingo 12 Junio 2005 01:24, Russell Coker escribió:
> > wrote:
> > > What about switching from getty to mingetty? Is there any reason to use
> > > getty by default?
> > Is there any reason to change?
> Then I discovered mingetty, which claims to be "small, efficient". I also
> discovered that getty has some code to allow dial in our computer, which
> most of the people don't use nowadays and it makes getty more complex than
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 12904 Mar 3 00:13 /sbin/mingetty
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 14264 Mar 23 01:21 /sbin/getty
1360 bytes difference. Also note that both file sizes are between 12K and 16K
in size. On a ReiserFS file system with tails enabled this may actually save
some disk space. On an ext2/3 file system it won't make any difference to
disk space. Memory is also allocated in 4K chunks so it's unlikely to make
any difference to memory use.
> Then I switched to mingetty and I never had problems with it.
> I sold my old hardware before the bug in getty got fixed.
> Now it seems that the problem is fixed (according to DBTS), but anyway I
> think that it is not a bad idea to switch to the simpler, smaller program
> that just-do-the-work. I think that the users that need a different *getty
> program have very specific needs and they know how to swich form mingetty
> to *getty (and anyway maybe they don't use getty but mgetty).
The problem is that a change is likely to cause problems for some people.
Without any clear benefit it's probably not worth the bother.
http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/ My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages
http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/postal/ Postal SMTP/POP benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page