Checking In On Ubuntu Karmic's Boot Time

[masinick]

I have seen Ubuntu make some improvement in boot times over the past two releases. My systems now boot in under thirty seconds, but since I do not have hot hardware, it's not quite down to the sub twenty second level; twenty five seconds is the best time I have seen from GRUB to GDM login screen.

[Panix]

what didn't you understand about the word development ?

where exactly does it crash ?

remove any "fastboot" from menu.lst and append

scsi_mod.scan=sync

if it's not caused by a crash from upstart or gdm, etc. it should be "fixed" temporarily,

after that wait some days and update your system and try again whether it boots fine without those settings

Where does it crash? At the desktop level. I could be doing anything. I tried Firefox.... crash. Another attempt at boot and checking it out, I opened Synaptic and trying to resize.... crash! It locks up so I can't even try to run or list a log.

[kernelOfTruth]

Booting fast is great but if it crashes after you get there, what good is it. Karmic is the only 'developmental distro' that locks up on my laptop after the boot.

what didn't you understand about the word development ?

where exactly does it crash ?

remove any "fastboot" from menu.lst and append

scsi_mod.scan=sync

if it's not caused by a crash from upstart or gdm, etc. it should be "fixed" temporarily,

after that wait some days and update your system and try again whether it boots fine without those settings

[benmoran]

Karmic is the only distro so far that suspends properly on my other laptop (Japanese Fujitsu L00X). I suspect it's mostly due to the awesomely improving OSS Radeon driver.

[Panix]

Booting fast is great but if it crashes after you get there, what good is it. Karmic is the only 'developmental distro' that locks up on my laptop after the boot.

[kernelOfTruth]

Suspend-to-disk can be slower than a normal boot, depending on your configuration. At least in my experience...

Suspend-to-RAM seems to be working reliably as long as you avoid any binary blobs.

Besides, fast boot time are completely orthogonal to either suspend/hibernation. I, for one, would *love* to see my virtual machines load in 10 seconds flat.

agreed, suspend-to-disk is noticably slower from my experience than to-ram (on an dell xps m1330),

with Karmic Koala Alpha5 + Updates from Yesterday (so to speak Alpha6)

binary blobs don't necessarily have to be a contradiction towards suspend-to-ram (as long as we're talking about nvidia blobs )

[deanjo]

Suspend-to-RAM seems to be working reliably as long as you avoid any binary blobs.

That, like so many other sleep/suspend issues seems very dependent on the hardware as well. My desktops with blobs for example work fine with s2r. (Although I rarely use it anyways as the systems are usually crunching away at something). Where it could be of a lot of use though is again the portables.

[deanjo]

By the way, I would prefer working suspend-to-disk to working suspend-to-RAM, even though it is necessarily a bit slower, but I like to power everything off entirely for the night.

Especially with todays SSD's. Suspend to disk should be alot faster on portable systems that use them making suspend to ram really not needed.

[BlackStar]

Suspend-to-disk can be slower than a normal boot, depending on your configuration. At least in my experience...

Suspend-to-RAM seems to be working reliably as long as you avoid any binary blobs.

Besides, fast boot time are completely orthogonal to either suspend/hibernation. I, for one, would *love* to see my virtual machines load in 10 seconds flat.

[nhaehnle]

Give me a working suspend over fast boots any day of the week.

Absolutely agree. Fast boot is nice, but it would be even better if we didn't have to boot in the first place.

By the way, I would prefer working suspend-to-disk to working suspend-to-RAM, even though it is necessarily a bit slower, but I like to power everything off entirely for the night.