[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Can we make readahead more robust to package updates?

On Sun, Nov 12, 2006 at 02:15:57PM -0900, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> On 11/12/06, Jeff Spaleta <jspaleta gmail com> wrote:
> >Okay its come to my attention that the readahead configs have a
> >difficult time being kept in sync as package updates roll out. For fc6
> >right now for example readahead is out of sync with firefox libraries.
> >
> >Can we update readahead's implementation so we can get per package
> >control of the default configs?  Is a readahead.d/ structure
> >appropriate here?
> Sorry... i didnt look hard enough... the readahead.d structure was
> added for fc6.... the problem is package maintainers aren't using it
> yet.  I guess what I need to do is parse the existing config file...
> identify individual packages that could drop files in readahead.d/
> and poke the appropriate maintainers in the eye about dropping a file
> in there as part of package payloading.
> Anyone want to help me construct the list of packages that could make
> sure of readahead.d/ on a per package basis based on the default
> readahead configs we have right now?

 Update: I've wrote a small and simple readahead-auditd that is able
 to collect all filenames from boot process. It means everyone will be
 able to generate unique list for his Fedora. And also I can maintain
 default lists more effective now. I'm going to release an
 experimental readahead package with this solution to FC7 next week.


 Karel Zak  <kzak redhat com>

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]