Re: Getting rid of hotplug & Co. for 2.6
On Wed, Feb 16, 2005 at 04:58:44PM -0500, Albert Cahalan wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-02-16 at 19:58 +0100, Wolfgang Pfeiffer wrote:
> > Hotplug and its colleagues: I confess my lowest instincts get mobilised
> > when thinking on this stuff: I slows down the whole boot process so
> > much that sometimes I feel like being on a 2.2 kernel.
> > So all I need to know: Can I run a 2.6 kernel without hal, udev and
> > hotplug being installed, or with these packages being disabled at boot
> > time at least?
> > Please tell me it will work ... :)
> I'm doing this right now. You pretty much have to, if you might
> want to boot an older kernel from time to time.
> Compile all needed features into your kernel, or explicitly load
> the needed modules during boot.
> Some of that new stuff is kind of broken-by-design, on purpose.
> Unlike devfs, which merely had a broken implementation, udev is
> unable to ensure that a device file will be there when you need it.
> Devices appear whenever they do, via hotplug, meaning that you
> need to run a heck of a lot of things via the hotplug system to
> avoid race conditions.
Not broken by design but just different :) The future is to have your stuff
started when the actual devices appear, either via hotplug or udev scripts.
Which will solve this problem and will save you boot time as stuff can happen
in parrallel.. Some of the ubuntu people have been experimenting with this,
and it showed a lot of promise.. Dunno what the current state is though..
> On the other hand, you give up some neat new features designed
> to help with hardware that varies a bit.
> What I'd like is GNOME without the nonsense desktop icons. I mean,
> really, who can ever find their desktop buried under all the apps?
> I left a plain-fvwm setup in part because my desktop gets buried,
> and then GNOME evolves to expect a viewable desktop!
Gnome 2.10 features a places menu to solve exactly this problem ;)
Man will never fly. Space travel is merely a dream. All aspirin is alike.