Idea
#8537: Apply all ideas to improve X startup time
|
|
This idea was marked as implemented the 2 June 08.
|
|
|
|
Done!
|
|
(376)
|
|
Written by romu the 14 May 08 at 11:48.
Category: Graphics.
Related to:
Nothing/Others.
Status: Implemented
|
|
|
Description
Developer comments
Ubuntu receives these fixes as they are applied upstream. If for some reason you see a patch upstream that hasn't been applied feel free to file a bug on Launchpad.
Attachments
Duplicates
Comments
|
timfidler wrote on the 14 May 08 at 12:43
|
It sounds like there is plenty of room for optimisation in X. I love this idea. Xandros on my Eee boots really quickly which may be down to it being stripped back, but I would love to see an improved boot time in Ubuntu.
A definite possible "selling" point for Intrepid.
|
|
Eldmannen wrote on the 14 May 08 at 14:40
|
Yes, improved startup time would be good.
Also better performance and better auto-detection and auto-configuration.
Faster X, hell yeah!
No one snuggles with Max Power, you strap yourself in and feel the Gs!"
|
|
Auzy wrote on the 14 May 08 at 15:03
| |
I don't think anyone sane would vote this down
|
|
peetie wrote on the 14 May 08 at 16:33
| |
This is a subset of my idea http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/8555 regarding taking advantage of the work done by other distributions in general. There is an epidemic of duplicate work in the areas of system tuning and configuration for which this (X11) is the tip of the iceberg.
|
|
jhoger wrote on the 14 May 08 at 19:02
|
Well Auzy likes it so I'm voting... just kidding.
Great idea, +1. Love performance improvements. Linux has a good rap for high performance with the general population but when it comes right down to it, it is often undeserved. We need to live up to our marketing hype.
|
|
thiagocmartinsc wrote on the 14 May 08 at 20:07
|
Will be great to remove usplash, and make boot just like "Mac OS X".
Maybe creating a usplash-like for X...
In fact, Ubuntu sets up graphical device two times on each boot, first there is a usplash graphical boot and then X starts another graphical interface... that's sucks.
I think will be nice to use Linux FrameBuffer instead X drivers... but no Linux drivers are so mature as X drivers...
The distro OpenDarwin is really cool on this area!
|
|
mp3phish wrote on the 14 May 08 at 22:59
|
screw linux framebuffer. Just put some ascii art at the begining to make it look more leet. And it will improve speed because no lame drivers, or mode switching, or etc.
Also, the fact that we are running on i386 binaries are pretty much one of the major causes of slow boot times. until they decide to switch to i686 binaries, you can tweak all you want and you will be working uphill. Or you can go to i686 binaries and then tweak it and it will be downhill.
Lastly, they just aren't interested in this. Until they take boot time seriously, it will all be just a buncha lame tweaks. there are literally hundreds of ways to improve boot speed (on modern computers) and they just aren't doing it. And its not like this issue is new.
Its a matter of priorities, and this just isn't one of them afaikt
|
|
bochecha wrote on the 15 May 08 at 00:19
|
Won't vote for this idea as it is totally missing the point.
The Fedora feature "One second X" doesn't need to be implemented in Ubuntu, simply because Fedora only works upstream.
This means that everything Fedora did on X, they did it *with* the X community and everything is *already* upstream.
So Ubuntu will only have to upgrade to the latest X release (Fedora 9 is using a beta of the next X release to come) and this feature will be implemented.
One more example of limited mind thinking that each distro should "implement" some features. Distros should only work upstream, this is the only way for everyone to win.
|
|
winter wrote on the 15 May 08 at 01:35
| |
Aren't there alternatives to init scripts? Won't that speed things up?
|
|
mp3phish wrote on the 15 May 08 at 03:26
|
I voted +1 for this idea, but it doesn't change my response above.
I also agree with the previous guy saying about needing to work upstream. This is key.
The real problems are that it isn't up to the core projects to solve all the boot problems, it is the distributer's jobs. They are the ones who make the boot sequence. And none of the distros are working upstream with their improvements. Shit, Ubuntu is using a 1980's boot sequence. They are not being selective on what to startup at boot. They are not reorganising the required bootup files for faster access, they are not using parallel startup scripts, and they are not using the 2GB+ system ram that 90% of new computers come with to its advantage when it comes to boot times. If they just took all the boot files and loaded them into into system ram in one fowl swoop and then ran the boot sequence in parallel the system would literally startup in what, 10-15 seconds. But instead we are talking about minutes, and the disk still grinding along all the way to the desktop and then an hour glass even then for another 30 seconds.
None of the technology required is new, its just not used and not implemented in upstream projects. and most distros have bigger fish to fry. Its unfortunate.
Great idea, but I am cynical because I just don't see it happening any time in this (digital) lifetime.
|
|
mp3phish wrote on the 15 May 08 at 03:42
|
see this link for more info. The kernel guys say its up to the user space guys (ie, the distro makers) to fix this problem. So basically the distro is passing the buck to the filesystem/kernel/x people, and the filesystem/kernel/x people are passing it to the distros.
http://kerneltrap.org/node/2157
I beileve the fault is with the distro.
|
|
romu wrote on the 15 May 08 at 08:08
|
@bochecha: Thanks for this information, I didn't know this and that's very interesting and really clarifies some points.
@mp3phish: To boot in 10/15s, just use BeOS ;-)
|
|
jiu wrote on the 15 May 08 at 10:44
| |
... or Archlinux
|
|
bochecha wrote on the 15 May 08 at 22:08
|
"@mp3phish: To boot in 10/15s, just use BeOS ;-) "
"... or Archlinux"
Here comes the troll ^_^
"The real problems are that it isn't up to the core projects to solve all the boot problems, it is the distributer's jobs. They are the ones who make the boot sequence. And none of the distros are working upstream with their improvements."
You're wrong. There is (at least) one distro working directly and only with upstream : Fedora.
They wanted to speedup the Xorg startup: they worked with the Xorg devs and we are now using a pre-release of the next Xorg on Fedora 9 (and believe me, improvements are there :)
They wanted to implement power management directly at GDM time instead of waiting for Gnome to be launched, they worked with the GDM devs and totally rewrote the GDM (you might see it in Intrebid as it is not finished yet).
I don't want to make the apology of Fedora and curse Ubuntu, but on this particular point, Fedora is definitely the good pupil.
Again, my comments on this idea was only to point out that *Ubuntu* doesn't need to *implement* *Fedora's idea* as it is already done upstream. However, nothing prevents Ubuntu to work with Fedora and Xorg upstream on this ;)
|
|
mp3phish wrote on the 16 May 08 at 03:43
|
@bochecha:
I agree with you about Fedora, but it doesn't change the fact that ubuntu's init sequences need a complete overhaul. Speeding up the x server and the gdm power management modules don't solve the other 90% of the problem with disk I/O bottlenecks, and etc. which is the root cause of most bootup time.
that 1 second X thing looks pretty sweet though.
|
|
jhoger wrote on the 16 May 08 at 17:08
|
We should just keep this simple and assume everything that is core to the distro is the responsibility of the distro.
Of course the distro should work with upstream where necessary. But the distro "owns" the issue.
a) They had it last
b) They are responsible for the overall user "experience"
c) They have the support contact/feedback of the user
d) They (often) have paid development resources
e) They compete with other distros for user mindshare. It's in their interest to make sure the user experience is positive.
etc.
|
|
bochecha wrote on the 24 May 08 at 17:46
|
@jhoger: do you really think what you say? Cause that's very sad :(
Distros don't compete with each others as they clearly don't have the same goals!
For example, Ubuntu is desktop-oriented and user-friendly, trying to replace Windows for the end-user. Fedora is development-oriented, freedom-extremist and trying to move forward aas fast as possible.
Both goals are totally valid, but they are clearly different and address very distinct markets!
The only way for everyone to benefit is to work upstream. That's how Ubuntu will benefit from what Slackware has done. That's how Slackware will benefit from what ArchLinux has done. Etc.
If each distro works on its own issues, and don't work upstream, then each distro will be totally different, everyone will keep reinventing the wheel, and in the end, no one will benefit (except Linux detractors).
|
|
jhoger wrote on the 24 May 08 at 20:27
|
bochecha, your comment would be more relevant on my idea that I linked.
But, I don't agree with you. The target sets of customer for Ubuntu, Redhat, SUSE and Mandrake are not disjoint. They overlap significantly. Further, these are commercial distros, so they sell commercial services and/or products.
So to say they don't compete is wrong. Distros compete for users. If you don't have users, your distro withers on the vine. If you're a commercial distro with no users, you have no customers.
|
|
bochecha wrote on the 25 May 08 at 20:00
|
Ok, now I agree with you that "this small set of distributions you chose are competing as there respective markets overlap" ;)
Now, competing doesn't mean that each one has to do its own developments, without sharing.
Those distros might be competing, they all have in common the "free software ethic".
And sharing there works allow to improve the whole FOSS ecosystem, growing the total market. For now, each commercial distribution can expand its market, without taking customers from the others.
How is it possible? Because Lots and lots and lots (and lots :) of customer companies are using "another OS". Proving that the FOSS ecosystem and the Linux distribution are a good bet for the future is the best way of making those companies switch, increasing the base of customers, thus increasing the market of *each* distribution.
And the best way to do that is for all of them to work together, directly upstream, so that everyone can benefit.
Once the market has totally moved to Linux, those commercial distributions will have to compete. Until then, there is still plenty of room for all of them to grow.
|
|
pengo wrote on the 5 Aug 08 at 22:55
|
Simple way to improve perceived startup time is to automatically login, so you don't have to wait AGAIN after entering your password.
I don't like setting auto login, because I want to require a password.
Simple solution: Automatically login and then lock! http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/11882/
|
Post your comment
|
|
|
Bug #207246