Comment 14 for bug 839595

Excerpts from Leo Milano's message of Thu Sep 08 19:17:14 UTC 2011:
> @ Scott: thanks for the detailed response. It all makes sense now. I am
> guessing perhaps wicd wrote that entry in my interfaces file. I haven't
> edited this file by hand.
>
> @ Clint: yes, I think it makes sense to add this to the release notes.
> Thanks for updating the description. It seems like this is a reasonable
> approach for now.
>
> Longer term, I think the start system needs more granularity. Ideally,
> if the network is still not up, most services (except for things like
> ntp, firewalls, etc) should start anyway. The user should still be able
> to get X up and running, and be able to login. But the current structure
> of one upstart hook to all sysvinit services won't allow for that.
>

Anything that a user depends on having before X is up should be an
upstart job and have a very granular start up. This change should only
affect general network services.

If you look, X should already be independent of this delay. Here is the
start condition for lightdm:

start on (filesystem
          and started dbus
          and (drm-device-added card0 PRIMARY_DEVICE_FOR_DISPLAY=1
               or stopped udevtrigger))

All of that can happen before runlevel 2 is emitted (which is all that is
actually blocked). I'm curious what your script measures as "boot time",
in the past, "able to log in" was used as the measurement.

> Thank you for the great work, and I hope this little extra bit of info
> benefits other users.

Leo, thanks for the heads up, I appreciate your testing and the feedback,
keep it coming!