Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 12:26:49 +0800 (PHT) From: "Anthony M. Magsino" <ammag@mail.upm.edu.ph> To: Scott <scottro@nyc.rr.com> Cc: Marco Radzinschi <marco@radzinschi.com>, Doug Garrick <dgarrick@sweetwaterhsa.com>, questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: 4.4 Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.96.1011122122254.31551B-100000@kulog.upm.edu.ph> In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20011118233146.0585be90@pop-server.nyc.rr.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi everybody! boot time depends on your hardware and your kernel configuration. you would have faster boot if you have a customized compact kernel. I have TL Linux 6.0, FreeBSD 4.3 and Win98SE on one machine. my boot times are as follows: FreeBSD: 12 sec :) TL Linux: 15 sec :) Win98SE: 64 sec :< On Sun, 18 Nov 2001, Scott wrote: > At 23:01 2001/11/18 -0500, Marco Radzinschi wrote: > > >I second that... bloody RedHat Linux 7 and 7.1 took 10 times as long to > >boot as FreeBSD. > > > Heh--this got me curious enough to do a very lax test--a machine where I > have several O/S's installed---KII6 450 with 192 megs of Ram. Booting from > RH's Grub, so I began counting after the O/S began to boot--that is, if I > choose FreeBSD, first it does this chainloader thing. > > Lots of factors that I ignored, but, with all but Win2k booting into text > mode.... > > Trustix Linux (a stripped down RH clone) > 15 seconds > FreeBSD 18 seconds > Slackware 8.0 18 seconds > RH 7.2 31 seconds > And, the Winner--- > Windows 2000 Professional 65 seconds. :) > > Subjectively, FreeBSD just seems faster in many ways --as if it reacts > more quickly to keystrokes than any of the others. > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.LNX.3.96.1011122122254.31551B-100000>