From owner-freebsd-hackers  Wed Jul  9 15:03:44 1997
Return-Path: <owner-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id PAA14947
          for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 9 Jul 1997 15:03:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from implode.root.com (implode.root.com [198.145.90.17])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id PAA14942
          for <hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>; Wed, 9 Jul 1997 15:03:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from implode.root.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by implode.root.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id PAA24433;
	Wed, 9 Jul 1997 15:02:45 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <199707092202.PAA24433@implode.root.com>
To: "Andrew Atrens" <atrens@nortel.ca>
cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: no SYSVSHM in GENERIC now.. 
In-reply-to: Your message of "09 Jul 1997 15:16:00 EDT."
             <199707091923.MAA02400@hub.freebsd.org> 
From: David Greenman <dg@root.com>
Reply-To: dg@root.com
Date: Wed, 09 Jul 1997 15:02:45 -0700
Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

>Does the X-server run any faster with MIT-SHM than without?
>If it runs faster then I would vote to keep the stuff in GENERIC.

   It only runs faster for applications which use the MIT-SHM extension, which
are _very_ few. I don't think anything in the standard X11 distribution uses
it, for example.

-DG

David Greenman
Core-team/Principal Architect, The FreeBSD Project