Fedora 16 beta vice Knoppix

Camilo Mesias camilo at mesias.co.uk
Wed Oct 19 10:40:40 UTC 2011


I tried some of these changes and they seemed to work reasonably well
apart from the grub2 infrastructure is still a bit immature at running
without initrd... specifically

* I couldn't find a way to tell the grub2 scripts in /etc/grub.d
(10_linux) that I didn't want initrd; I can edit out the initrd line
at boot time
* new kernels from yum stopped being installed because the
grub2-mkconfig script chain relies on /dev/root which is missing in my
initrdless boot; if I make ln -s /dev/sda3 /dev/root then the script
starts working again
* I suspect other stuff in grub2.cfg isn't needed for initrdless (eg.
UUID is still mentioned)

I'm not sure where to report this? Bugs against grub2 or something
else? Is there a specific forum for initrdless working?


On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 10:45 PM, Lennart Poettering
<mzerqung at 0pointer.de> wrote:
> On Tue, 04.10.11 21:01, JB (jb.1234abcd at gmail.com) wrote:
>> Results interpretation.
>> -----------------------
>> Knoppix won by a wide margin, while:
>> - Knoppix having microknoppix fast-parallel boot (based on SysV/LSB scripts)
>>   and DE with low resources usage and tailored for desktops
>> - Fedora having systemd parallel boot and DE tailored for small and simple
>>   devices
>   ^^^^^ huh? Fedora is not tailored for that. Would be great of it it
>   was, but that's simply not the case.
> We install LVM and iSCSI and all kinds of other enterprisey stuff
> on even the smallest netbook. And LVM is a major source of slowness,
> since it requires all devices to be synchronously settled, before
> "vgscan" can be called.
> Also, we use SELinux and stuff which doesn't speed things up
> either. SELinux has become a lot faster at boot in F16, so that's good,
> but there's still a price to pay for it, which is more noticable the
> weaker your machine is. That said, I do believe that SELinux is a good
> thing and should definitely be part of the default install.
> Another bigger source of slowness at boot is currently Plymouth which
> also requires synchronous settling of devices (tough it's not as bad as
> LVM in that regard though, but costs too since EDID probing is
> apparently quite slow, and has every right to, but right now we delay
> the boot processes for that but we shoudl really do that in the
> background).
> I have been asking for the removal of LVM from the default install since
> a long time, and I am still firmly of the opinion that LVM needs to be
> something that folks who want it enable but not something that slows
> down everybody else's boot.
> If you want a quick boot on a netbook, then remove LVM, iscsi and the
> other enterprisey storage stuff. Then run "systemctl mask
> fedora-wait-storage.service fedora-storage-init-late.service
> fedora-readonly.service fedora-storage-init.service
> fedora-loadmodules.service fedora-autoswap.service
> fedora-configure.service rc-local.service" to mask a couple of always-on
> services, that are needed for enterprisey and legacy stuff. Also
> consider disabling stuff like abrtd, or even rsyslog (if you do all log
> output goes to kmsg, which reduces disk acesses and is often good
> enough), and audit, cpupower, iptables, lldapd, mcelog, multipathd,
> lvm2-monitor, mdmonitor, fcoe, dm-event. Check with "systemctl
> list-unit-files" what's still left. Then shortcut the initrd by adding
> "rootfstype=ext4" to your kernel cmdline amd replacing
> "root=UUID=XXXXXXXXX" by "root=/dev/sda6" (or whatever your harddisk is
> named in the kernel; what's important here is that the kernel can't look
> for harddisks by uuid on its own, that's only done by the
> initrd). Bypassing the initrd is well supported on F16 again, with one
> exception: plymouth breaks, so disable that: "plymouth.disable=0" on the
> kernel cmdline. On my netbook this gives me a bios-to-gdm bootup time of
> around 10s, on my laptop of 5s, and Kay's newer laptop of < 3s. And it's
> still an awesomely complete system, including SELinux and everything.
> And if you compare that with Knoppix then you will still be comparing
> apples and oranges, but we should be much more in the area of what
> Knoppix provides as boot times.
> I'd really like to see Fedora default to some more light-weight
> choices. Not only for netbooks and suchlike having LVM and all the
> enterprise stuff in the default is a bad choice, but for server VMs
> which tend to more lightweight that's the case too. The goals of what is
> needed to cope with netbooks and what is needed to cope with
> lightweighter VMs are actually much closer then people might think, and
> I'd love to see Fedora focus more on both.
> Lennart
> --
> Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc.
> --
> devel mailing list
> devel at lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

More information about the devel mailing list