Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 30 May 2010 23:21:27 -0300
From:      "Carlos A. M. dos Santos" <unixmania@gmail.com>
To:        Eitan Adler <lists@eitanadler.com>
Cc:        x11@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: libxcb message - is it still relevant
Message-ID:  <AANLkTinEJ52dXNtmCBM7idR6F3SSvb280Xo38Gfx-w9R@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinUI0JZOF4msIskhWYn2roSbT8hRaWE8Ra0_POu@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <AANLkTik9QWWpfXamvkp6yQA8GhoyQ639G7Lcfdv2vOHA@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTimGINDoWbxaf0QoEDya0L4GAQ1cxWk5yPCT2VH2@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTinUI0JZOF4msIskhWYn2roSbT8hRaWE8Ra0_POu@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 6:29 AM, Eitan Adler <lists@eitanadler.com> wrote:
> On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 2:58 AM, Carlos A. M. dos Santos
> <unixmania@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 7:41 AM, Eitan Adler <lists@eitanadler.com> wrote:
>>> As far as I could tell xcb is currently the default Xlib. Is the
>>> following message that libXcb is experimental still true?
> ...
>>
>> No, but if the - informal - experiments I made are correct the claims
>> about "dramatic improvements in speed" are an exaggeration.
>
> It would be nice if the message were removed.
> About the speed - what kind of experiments did you perform?

Mostly ran x11perf with and without XCB enabled and compared the
results. Unfortunately the test was not complete because it led the X
server to crash[1]. Not a surprise, considering the miserable state of
Xorg regarding QA.

1. http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-x11/2009-December/009261.html

-- 
Not so young, but still crying out
Full of anger full of doubt



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?AANLkTinEJ52dXNtmCBM7idR6F3SSvb280Xo38Gfx-w9R>