From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Nov 16 03:51:00 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91A8F1065670 for ; Mon, 16 Nov 2009 03:51:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wblock@wonkity.com) Received: from wonkity.com (wonkity.com [67.158.26.137]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 408738FC14 for ; Mon, 16 Nov 2009 03:50:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from wonkity.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by wonkity.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id nAG3oth3088828; Sun, 15 Nov 2009 20:50:55 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from wblock@wonkity.com) Received: from localhost (wblock@localhost) by wonkity.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) with ESMTP id nAG3otNt088825; Sun, 15 Nov 2009 20:50:55 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from wblock@wonkity.com) Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2009 20:50:55 -0700 (MST) From: Warren Block To: Polytropon In-Reply-To: <20091116010630.0b8f498a.freebsd@edvax.de> Message-ID: References: <42052.1258327169@tristatelogic.com> <4B009370.1040002@otenet.gr> <20091116010630.0b8f498a.freebsd@edvax.de> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.2 (wonkity.com [127.0.0.1]); Sun, 15 Nov 2009 20:50:55 -0700 (MST) Cc: Manolis Kiagias , freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Trivial questions about CNTL-ALT-DEL and CNTL-ALT-BACKSPACE X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2009 03:51:00 -0000 On Mon, 16 Nov 2009, Polytropon wrote: > On Mon, 16 Nov 2009 01:49:04 +0200, Manolis Kiagias wrote: >> By the way Xorg configuration becomes more and more elusive. Initially, >> DontZap was enough. Then it had no effect at all and the fdi file was >> needed. Now seems both are needed. What's next? > > If this continues, I'll run my 5.4-p8 workstation with "old > fashioned" X (already X.org) until I die. :-) > > No, honestly: X is going to be more and more annoying. Have > you noticed the long startup time? Nearly a half minute (!!!) > on a 1.5 GHz system! That's way too long for just X. Bloated desktop environment? Disk contention? > I know that there is lots of work done to make life easier for X > developers, especially getting rid of many OS specific stuff, but... > > Finally, sliding more off-topic: Not only X gets slower with each > release, the same applies for almost all X applications, except the > "old fashioned" ones. It sounds like we have very different experiences. While I wouldn't say the current xorg is a lot faster (not counting DRM), it's certainly not slower on any of the systems I have to test. But I don't know what video board you're using either. -Warren Block * Rapid City, South Dakota USA