Graphical boot issues: a.o. graphical boot twice slower then text boot!!!

[Owen Taylor]

On Tue, 2003-10-07 at 19:47, Owen Taylor wrote:

> Possible explanations of these facts that really don't convince me:
> 
> A) Many of the libraries used by rhgb and gdm are used by various
>    bits of the init process and are loaded parallelized with 
>    other tasks between the point that rhgb starts and the point
>    that gdm starts. (This only makes sense if most of the load time for
>    rhgb was non-GUI libraries. Which I don't believe.)
> 
> B) One of the init steps that runs *after* we start rhgb speeds up
>    the system by a large factor. (What? /etc/sysconfig/harddisks
>    is run later but does nothing on this test system)
> 
> Next thing I want to do is to boot into runlevel 3 and see how long
> rhgb takes to run cold there. 
> 
> (Both A) and B) predict that it should take around 9-10 seconds, so it
> can't distinguish between them. But if it takes much longer that would
> tend to disprove both of them.)

Takes 8 seconds. Which is consistent with these theories and many
others.

So, I tried:

 - Boot into runlevel 1. Run rhgb. 
   Run rhgb. 22 seconds from X => on screen
 - Remove all network services and xfs from runlevel 3.
   Run rhgb. 8 seconds from X => on screen
 - Remove *all* services from runlevel 3 (syslog and all)
   Run rhgb. 8 seconds from X => on screen 

So, the evidence at this point is that with *more* services in
runlevel 1 then in runlevel 3, starting in runlevel 1 takes 10+
seconds extra.

In fact, I can use 'telinit' to switch between the two levels
and observe this.

So, now I need to figure out what is different between runlevel 1
and runlevel 3 other than the services running.

Regards,
						Owen