On Sat, May 08, 2010 at 11:37:10AM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> So it is the classical desktop vs. server situation. For my Debian
> servers, that get booted at most once a month, I don't give a damn
> about a faster boot.
>
> I _do_ care, however, about not having migrations in the boot process
> which has the potential of breaking a system reboot, possibly making
> it necessary to obtain a means to access the console in case of
> breakage.
Sure, but I don't think that the server argument should be use to imply
that no changes, that benefit some of our users, are allowed at all.
Ideally, you shouldn't care about boot performance improvements, as long
as they do not introduce new (critical) bugs for your usage scenario.
Whether this is possible or not in the specific case at hand is what
we're all trying to understand in this thread.
Cheers.
--
Stefano Zacchiroli -o- PhD in Computer Science \ PostDoc @ Univ. Paris 7
zack@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} -<>- http://upsilon.cc/zack/
Dietro un grande uomo c'è ..| . |. Et ne m'en veux pas si je te tutoie
sempre uno zaino ...........| ..: |.... Je dis tu à tous ceux que j'aime
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature