Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 19 Sep 2004 01:56:14 +0200
From:      Benjamin Walkenhorst <krylon@gmx.net>
To:        freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: X.org performance?
Message-ID:  <20040919015614.6313c9db.krylon@gmx.net>
In-Reply-To: <s38ekkz16ud.fsf@numerus.ling.uu.se>
References:  <20040918165741.20d10137.krylon@gmx.net> <200409181101.25973.josh@tcbug.org> <20040918183953.0666ea91.krylon@gmx.net> <s38ekkz16ud.fsf@numerus.ling.uu.se>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 19 Sep 2004 01:43:22 +0200
bkhl@elektrubadur.se (Bj=F6rn Lindstr=F6m) wrote:

> Benjamin Walkenhorst <krylon@gmx.net> writes:
>=20
> > Or is it just my perception tricking me, while Xorg is not that
> > different from XFree, technically?
>=20
> Is your configuration identical? Using certain modules can cost some
> cycles, for instance, so if you also started using any of those with
> your switch, that could explain your impression.

Mmmh, I did not touch the configuration file at all.
Haven't looked at it in a while, actually.
I'll look there and try to disable unused/unneccessary modules.

Thanks,
Benjamin

--=20
If cars had improved at [the computer industry's] rate, a Rolls Royce
would now cost 10 dollars and get a billion miles per gallon.
(Unfortunately, it would probably also have 200-page manual telling how
to open the door.)
--
Andrew Tanenbaum, "Introduction To Distributed Systems"


Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040919015614.6313c9db.krylon>