Trying to reduce our memory and battery footprint

[Ted Gould]

On Mon, 2012-10-15 at 21:19 +0200, Sebastien Bacher wrote:
> Le 15/10/2012 21:10, Ted Gould a écrit :
> > I don't believe that
> > happened in the Q cycle, do we think that we could get upstart
>
> James pinged me recently because foundation is planning work for next 
> cycle and wanted to know what's the most important on the list for 
> desktop. I said it would be "user session jobs", do other still agree 
> with that? If you have other request I think there is still time at UDS 
> to discuss those

I still don't understand why we want a single upstart instance and not
one system one and one per session.  I think that having a single
instance is what makes user jobs difficult as you have to handle all the
states of things like encrypted file systems, where if we started the
upstart process later, PAM/lightdm would do it for us.  There are other
benefits too, but at least if I can move that out of the way I can get
other features :-)

The feature that upstart doesn't have today that I think would help the
most on the power/memory front is file watches.  That way processes that
watch a set of files for some change, could just be started when that
change happens, deal with it, and then shut themselves down.

Second for me would be DConf key watches.  It is hard today to have
something start when a key is set to "True" to enable a feature.
Usually there has to be some sort of framework involved or a process has
to sit around waiting to be enabled.

		--Ted

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-desktop/attachments/20121015/72083cea/attachment.pgp>