From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1RVRnv-0002Gb-Qk for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 29 Nov 2011 17:49:16 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2DE6521C039; Tue, 29 Nov 2011 17:49:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from out5.smtp.messagingengine.com (out5.smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.29]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8756E21C027 for ; Tue, 29 Nov 2011 17:47:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.mail.srv.osa [10.202.2.41]) by gateway1.nyi.mail.srv.osa (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32DF02380A for ; Tue, 29 Nov 2011 12:47:36 -0500 (EST) Received: from frontend2.nyi.mail.srv.osa ([10.202.2.161]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 29 Nov 2011 12:47:36 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=letterboxes.org; h=message-id:subject:from:to:date:in-reply-to:references :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; s=mesmtp; bh=HHoV/+zOSu6fXbPiYFtIkArSOoU=; b=eEG0yzXkIFVujUjPQHhtxopbUsoZ g03/nrCZHm4w2tkrdOPqhmFjz5niO8UuSSH+rhb8yEuxvdh5gSrNX973yuIy8GnR UWeWH7KwZNCoG2PdcvOOpAZBkn5zDu4m7DpIVaBmRAOhrK1aSrtyzc2Rd1zg5DoD C/sYV+zpEswx5xw= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=message-id:subject:from:to:date :in-reply-to:references:content-type:content-transfer-encoding :mime-version; s=smtpout; bh=HHoV/+zOSu6fXbPiYFtIkArSOoU=; b=lcd rGLNW9zI3Iz2XxW1UtWLbig7lIx+rB7bIB8HNGK1arI5+7puZQRwLkIxw0eV92wZ XpPwH+ijLu4XnXia62dnAq19njTDK/opBmPPcPe0djRAqTuozrswEocOZeyOqjXK NBe8aD9PDIPOritQt6Xs3tOzpO4xdn3o4mSjsHsk= X-Sasl-enc: ypV+atJDRs6LX6J3JeMoUSVXlJWQseOgBKeKA1XzOGfP 1322588855 Received: from [192.168.0.138] (65.23.112.45.nw.nuvox.net [65.23.112.45]) by www.fastmail.fm (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C94A4482594 for ; Tue, 29 Nov 2011 12:47:35 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <1322588855.15879.3.camel@stretch> Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What happened to OpenRC 0.9.6? From: "Albert W. Hopkins" To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 12:47:35 -0500 In-Reply-To: <4ED5175F.5030800@alyf.net> References: <4ED28F6A.7090606@alyf.net> <1322483386.66469.4.camel@stretch> <4ED3BDD4.4060704@binarywings.net> <4ED3E7B5.8090403@binarywings.net> <4ED5175F.5030800@alyf.net> Face: 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 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Archives-Salt: c3c03cd3-03a5-478d-ad31-fbb9e472a7ae X-Archives-Hash: 7bbb0526eb5026b7fb0387a6e04bab0d On Tue, 2011-11-29 at 18:33 +0100, Andrea Conti wrote: > I was just a little surprised that a system package turned out to be > completely broken in a scenario that I thought was quite widespread, > especially among the devs (as rc_parallel results in _very_ tangible > time savings, especially on a desktop with lots of services and > frequent > boots). I have desktops and have not seen any noticable difference in startup times with rc_parallel. The config file even says "slight speed" improvement, then goes on with a *huge* caveat as if to say "yeah, you might see a little difference, but it's probably not worth it for most people". Basically I take that to mean, it *may* speed things up slightly for some people. If it works for you, great for you. If it breaks, you get to pick up the pieces.