From owner-freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Sep 12 20:48:55 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-rc@freebsd.org Received: from mx2.freebsd.org (mx2.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::35]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC8341065674; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 20:48:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (hub.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::36]) by mx2.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3A8F161A55; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 20:48:18 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <5050F511.6050305@FreeBSD.org> Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 10:48:17 -1000 From: Doug Barton Organization: http://www.FreeBSD.org/ User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:15.0) Gecko/20120907 Thunderbird/15.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ian Lepore References: <86sjao7q8c.fsf@ds4.des.no> <20120911205302.27484fd6@gumby.homeunix.com> <20120911200925.GA88456@dragon.NUXI.org> <504FA76A.5000209@delphij.net> <20120911211730.GB89188@dragon.NUXI.org> <504FAB87.3020701@delphij.net> <20120911215212.GA89515@dragon.NUXI.org> <504FBD15.8040907@delphij.net> <20120911230121.GA90289@dragon.NUXI.org> <504FC7B0.2060706@delphij.net> <20120912000738.GA90897@dragon.NUXI.org> <1347461022.1110.29.camel@revolution.hippie.lan> In-Reply-To: <1347461022.1110.29.camel@revolution.hippie.lan> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Arthur Mesh , freebsd-rc@freebsd.org, =?UTF-8?B?RGFnLQ==?=, obrien@freebsd.org, RW , =?UTF-8?B?RXJsaW5nIO+/vQ==?= , d@delphij.net Subject: Re: svn commit: r239569 - head/etc/rc.d X-BeenThere: freebsd-rc@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion related to /etc/rc.d design and implementation." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 20:48:55 -0000 On 9/12/2012 4:43 AM, Ian Lepore wrote: > On Tue, 2012-09-11 at 17:07 -0700, David O'Brien wrote: >> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 04:22:24PM -0700, Xin Li wrote: >>> Please consider using sha512... >> >> What is the performance (boot time) impact on low-end MIPS and ARM >> systems? >> >> I'm all for sha512, but don't want to be shot with a machine gun (vs. >> simple pistol). >> > > For the embedded systems I take care of, the performance problem on > low-end systems is likely to be solved by ignoring all of this angels > dancing on a pin stuff and supplying an alternate kickstart mechanism > appropriate to the way the system is used (which almost surely won't be > in any national security datacenter). > > I can assure you that neither shaXXX nor gzip nor anything else that > eats that many cycles will be involved. :) > > I just hope one of things coming out of all this is a reasonable > mechanism for supplying alternate kickstart data. I haven't yet heard any feedback on my suggestion to have one set of default "safe" commands that are low-impact enough for embedded systems, and another set to be added by default to more standard systems. Do you think that this would address your concerns Ian? Doug