Results 1 to 6 of 6
what is the fastest kernel
my machine takes about 2 mins to start into linux but it can start in to xp in about 15 seconds
i don't know it ...
Enjoy an ad free experience by logging in. Not a member yet? Register.
- 08-12-2003 #1Linux Newbie
- Join Date
- Jun 2003
- Location
- 55 (degrees) north 7 west
- Posts
- 126
fastest kernel
what is the fastest kernel
my machine takes about 2 mins to start into linux but it can start in to xp in about 15 seconds
i don't know it could just be my slow hard drive or there could be something wrong with it but does anyones else's kernel take that long?
i'm using suse 8.2 and the hd is 4 years old and it runs at 5400 rpmThanks v much
\"Anything bigger than my ego i want it caught and killed\"- Zaphod Beeblebrox
Multi boot:
Win xp home, SuSE 8.2 and Slackware 9.1
- 08-12-2003 #2Linux Guru
- Join Date
- Apr 2003
- Location
- London, UK
- Posts
- 3,284
when you say start into linux do you mean bring up a gui from the time you turn the PC on?
I have seen installation's where redhat like's to start extra daemons like Apache, Sendmail, MySQL, DNS server's, NNTP server's etc
If you dont need any of these, you can stop them loading at start up with "chkconfig".
Jason
- 08-13-2003 #3Just Joined!
- Join Date
- Apr 2003
- Location
- Australia & England
- Posts
- 75
As Jaguar pointed out, when you have a number of services to start, this will slow down the booting process. One of the slowest tasks during my boot is bringing up the network (net.eth0). However, because I use a modem for the internet and only network occasionally to my laptop, I manually start that when I need to use it, hence letting me have about 10 seconds quicker for a boot.
You should check to make sure you are starting only the services you need. You can always simply start a service when you want to use it, such as apache, mysql etc.
Another reason for a slower boot is the number of modules the kernel has to load, if you compile more into the kernel is bigger, but will boot faster, if you choose to create modules, the kernel is smaller, but will boot slower because the kernel must load these at boot time.
XP is a sly beast during booting up, because you can be at the login screen and it is still starting services and processes while you are logging in and after you have logged in. So it is difficult to compare boot times of XP and Linux - the only way is to time how long Linux takes to boot to a final point where all services and processes are started, versus booting XP where you know all services and processes are started (and how do you know when XP is done? I don't know!!
)
- 08-15-2003 #4Linux Newbie
- Join Date
- Jun 2003
- Location
- 55 (degrees) north 7 west
- Posts
- 126
i think it is the network loading thing that slows it down alot cause when its starting it says something like logging on to network or something likr that. is there anyway to stop that?
and it is the booting process that takes so long not the loading of the gui that takes so long.
thanks for the helpThanks v much
\"Anything bigger than my ego i want it caught and killed\"- Zaphod Beeblebrox
Multi boot:
Win xp home, SuSE 8.2 and Slackware 9.1
- 08-15-2003 #5
ventrice: well, you can put files in /etc/modules.conf and have the modules loaded only when needed.
Besides, I don't think that GNU/Linux is made for rebooting. Like most windows versions are..
- 08-15-2003 #6Linux Engineer
- Join Date
- Mar 2003
- Location
- U.S.A.
- Posts
- 1,025
To further illustrate a point made before on linux and xp when loading services:
All Windows varitions load the kernal and gui/logon first giving the illustion that it is done when in fact it has a long way to go.
All linux varations load the boot loader, kernal, all services and last the gui or cmd interface.
If someone see's these as off base/incorrect please post a correction.Dan
\"Keep your friends close and your enemies even closer\" from The Art of War by Sun Tzu\"


Reply With Quote
