From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 26 Jun 2001 08:18:22 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 26 Jun 2001 08:18:13 -0400 Received: from elektra.higherplane.net ([203.37.52.137]:65498 "EHLO elektra.higherplane.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 26 Jun 2001 08:17:58 -0400 Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2001 22:36:04 +1000 From: john slee To: Daniel Phillips Cc: Colonel , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [OT] Re: Thrashing WITHOUT swap. Message-ID: <20010626223604.O30872@higherplane.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <01062518321604.01008@starship> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.18i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jun 25, 2001 at 06:32:16PM +0200, Daniel Phillips wrote: > On Monday 25 June 2001 18:16, Colonel wrote: > > Had you tried fvwm-1.24r (the original) ? It was designed long ago to > > be lean and fast on the desktop. I know it whips KDE. > > Yes, I did. It's even faster than xfce but there's one problem: it just > isn't very much like a modern desktop. xfce is, to a surprising degree, like > a modern desktop. It's roughly equivalent to W95 I'd say - more > sophisticated in some areas, less in others. Oh, did I mention I haven't run > into a bug yet? It's true. firstly, i better have at least one paragraph related to the kernel ;) 2.4 is a *much* better desktop than 2.2 for me. make -j32 bzImage and other large amounts of processes/io don't destroy the interactivity of my X session anymore. (wearing asbestos suit) i have run, as full-time desktops, kde-1.x, enlightenment, windowmaker and fvwm-* on 10baseT switched networks with Tektronix XP400 terminals hosted on linux (and of course on xfree86-based normal linux desktops) in both cases the better and "more interactive" window manager was not fvwm or wmaker. sure, E can be a pig with the right theme, but with a nice lightweight theme it is great. E certainly seems lots better over ethernet than the other two... kde 1.x of course was absolutely ghastly over a network (gnome not too prominent in those days, so i didn't get a chance to try it) lately i have been trying to make kde2 run smooth like my E setup, but there are some niggles, and i wouldn't bother if i had less than 256mb ram. j. -- "Bobby, jiggle Grandpa's rat so it looks alive, please" -- gary larson