Downside of removing plymouth

[Jamwa]

I miss the old days of the screen printing [OK][OK][OK] when loading. I had tweaked my plymouth to achieve the same but seems like an update to F15 undid what I had done.

My question therefore is, if I yum remove plymouth, will my PC still boot?

[smr54]

Rather than remove plymouth (which will probably be necessary for something or other), I've found that if I remove the rhgb quiet at the end of the kernel line, even when the kernel updates, it will continue to show the boot screen. (That is, when a new kernel is installed, grub automatically updates, putting the new kernel as the first one listed. However, when it does it, if you have removed the rhgb quiet from the previous kernel, when the new one is installed, it too will not have rhgb quiet at the end of the line.)

[Jamwa]

Originally Posted by smr54

Rather than remove plymouth (which will probably be necessary for something or other), I've found that if I remove the rhgb quiet at the end of the kernel line, even when the kernel updates, it will continue to show the boot screen. (That is, when a new kernel is installed, grub automatically updates, putting the new kernel as the first one listed. However, when it does it, if you have removed the rhgb quiet from the previous kernel, when the new one is installed, it too will not have rhgb quiet at the end of the line.)

I have removed rhgb quiet and now it is a lot more verbose.

Yes I notice though that F15 does not have as many [OK] messages as F14. Am guessing its as nirik mentioned about parallel starts.

By the way GNOME 3 is so different (nicely). Takes a new mindset to navigate it. I like!

[nirik]

The "[OK]" stuff was more a function of upstart back in f14.
In f15 we have systemd, and since it starts things in parallel as much as it can, the OK's don't match up, so it's a lot less useful.

[Chilly Willy]

Yeah, F15 has a whole LOT of new, different ways of doing things from what they were before, I just wonder how long it will take to figure THIS mess out?

[DukeNukem]

Originally Posted by Chilly Willy

Yeah, F15 has a whole LOT of new, different ways of doing things from what they were before, I just wonder how long it will take to figure THIS mess out?

The Fedora Project aims to lead the advancement of FOSS, not follow. Its frequently changing nature is a direct consequence of that aim.

If this is not what you want, use something else

[Chilly Willy]

Maybe "mess" was a poor choice of words, as I didn't mean it in a negative sense. - Just that there IS a whole lot of changes (a lot more than I recall in any one version change before) & they MAY get a bit overwhelming to figure out, (for a while, at least) whereas if there were only a few, (as usual) not so much of a problem. BUT, that is what makes "cutting edge" fun. (& lets face it, sometimes a PITA) But given the alternatives? - I'll stick with Fedora!!!

[smr54]

Just for fun, I removed plymouth, its core libs and scripts--of course, it wanted to take dracut with it, which is wrong, as dracut, according to the wiki, has no dependencies.


So, turns out it is unnecessary.

BTW, @DukeNukem, one doesn't always have the choice of using something else. For better or worse, RH dominates the server market, at least in the US, so if you work in the field, it's necessary to keep ahead of what RH will do next.

(Not to mention various folks taking courses, whether in a university or not, who are required to use Fedora.)

[sonoran]

If you want to see a mess, run the mount command in a terminal. Someone has a strange sense of humor.

Hope they know what they're doing.

[RupertPupkin]

Originally Posted by Jamwa

if I yum remove plymouth, will my PC still boot?

Yes. Plymouth is not necessary at all for booting. This worked for me:

rpm -e plymouth plymouth-scripts plymouth-core-libs dracut

My F15 system boots just fine without plymouth. The one semi-useful thing plymouth did do was to save all those "Starting <some_service>" screen messages to /var/log/boot.log, but I watch those messages as they go by anyway. So I don't see any real downside to removing plymouth.

[sea]

I know the topic as a bit aged, but as i had removed plymouth using yum, it remopved dracut along it.
Now i'm not sure, but isnt dracut quite essential to boot properly?
At least, the 3 boots i had done without it, worked well, BUT, as soon i had sent any command in a terminal window, i lost the GUI was sent back to console where no keypress worked as expected.

Any ideas about this?

PS: This is for F16.

[sonoran]

Reading man dracut.cmdline there is an option "plymouth.enable=0" to disable plymouth.

I would think that your initramfs would get stale before too long without dracut to build a new one, like after a kernel update. Although, dracut describes itself as "event-driven", which makes it similar in theory to systemd. Hmmm, perhaps there is a method to their madness after all.

[RupertPupkin]

Originally Posted by sea

isnt dracut quite essential to boot properly?

No. I'm running F16 with no problems, without plymouth or dracut installed. I have no idea why your terminal is acting up. The only thing I can think of is that maybe your desktop environment is trying to do something behind the scenes that depends on dracut.

[nirik]

You can uninstall dracut if you like, but you won't be able to generate a new initramfs file (so you won't be able to update kernels).

Even though you don't have dracut installed, it's output (the initramfs) still exists and runs on boot.

[RupertPupkin]

Originally Posted by nirik

You can uninstall dracut if you like, but you won't be able to generate a new initramfs file (so you won't be able to update kernels).

Not quite true. When you get a new kernel through yum update it pulls in dracut and plymouth as dependencies. So you can update the kernel and then just remove dracut and plymouth again if you like. That's what I do, it works for me.