[ale] compiled system calls versus shell scripts

[Bjorn Dittmer-Roche]

On Thu, 23 Oct 2003, Geoffrey wrote:

> Christopher Bergeron wrote:
> > Aahhh!  That explains why when I "time" each I get almost double results
> > from the compiled binary.  I created a shell script and a binary that do
> > the exact same thing and I got results that were opposite (as you
> > described) from what I expected.  For those that don't know, you can
> > "time" a command by simply running:  ' time whatever.sh ' or ' time
> > binaryfilename '.  When the program is completed, you'll be presented
> > with a timing calculation of the execution time.  As a result (of my
> > result), I decided to post this thread to the list.  Thanks for sheding
> > some light on it, Doug!!!
> >
> > Does anyone know how to do the Make / Makefile thing at bootup?  How
> > does one build the makefile, and where do you put it?
>
> All make is going to do for you is parallel processing of some
> processes.  You could likely do the same by simply reviewing your
> startup scripts and enabling background running of those that you know
> can run in a parallel fashion.
>
> For example, you know networking needs to be up before Samba is started.
>   But, startup of samba and nfs could be parallel processes.

Make is a little smarter than that. EG. if you have a copplex web of
dependencies, rather than just a few things that can happen in parallel,
make might do better.

	bjorn