Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 17:26:46 -0500 (CDT) From: Alex Nash <nash@mcs.net> To: luomat+FreeBSD@luomat.peak.org Cc: fewtch@serv.net, freebsd-newbies@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Major hardware reorganization... Message-ID: <199806182226.RAA18321@nash.pr.mcs.net> In-Reply-To: <199806181637.MAA27806@luomat.peak.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 18 Jun, Timothy J Luoma wrote: >> Win95 is the only OS that supports all my hardware, and for >> certain operations is the fastest (it definitely boots the quickest >> of the 3 OS's, BSD second, Win NT third) > > Well Win95 should reboot fast, given all the the times it has to reboot (not > a flame, just a fact.... many/most changes under Win95 require a reboot to > update the system). > > BSD does take quite awhile to boot... I wonder how much of it might be > trimmed down if a custom kernel was built to the specifics of only what > hardware was on the machine. Building a custom kernel will certainly reduce the boot time, as will removing any unnecessary daemons. My 486/100 laptop boots up in 41 seconds (timed until the login: prompt appeared), and provides mail services equivalent to MS Exchange, a secure shell service, and assorted services courtesy of inetd (FTP, telnet, finger etc.). My Pentium II 233MHz takes about 43 seconds to load Windows 95 (timed until the cursor actually became usable -- getting a GUI with an hourglass doesn't count), and provides only one service: SMB file sharing. Alex To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-newbies" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199806182226.RAA18321>