Yes, I noticed too that the new GNUstep is a bit slow. But not too. On my machine, GWorkspace works fine and fast. So your problem should be something with configuration or installation.
On mar, 2011-04-26 at 18:12 +0100, Richard Stonehouse wrote: > GNUstep built from the recent tarballs: > > gnustep-make-2.6.0 > gnustep-base-1.22.0 > gnustep-gui-0.20.0 > gnustep-back-0.20.0 > > runs but seems very slow. On launching GWorkspace, it takes approx > 30 - 35 secs before a blank window appears, and a further 10 - 15 > secs before this gets filled in with the file browser display. During > the whole of this time GWorkspace is taking nearly 100% of the CPU. In > the previous version (make-2.4.0, base-1.20.1, gui- and back-0.18.0) > the whole sequence used to take just 2 - 3 secs. > > Other operations in GWorkspace, e.g. moving to an adjacent column in > the display, are also slow and CPU-intensive. Other applications, > e.g. SystemPreferences, show similar but less extreme symptoms. > > It may well be that I've made an error in the build, but the only > obviously suspicious thing is a message in the gnustep-base build > output: > > "gnustep-base-1.22.0-1130.1-results.txt:checking for thread-safe > +initialize in runtime... configure: WARNING: Your ObjectiveC > runtime does not support thread-safe class initialisation. Please > use a different runtime if you intend to use threads." > > The machine is single-processor and the Objective C library is > > libobjc45-4.5.0_20100604 > > from the openSUSE 11.3 distribution. > > Is this a known problem? (I seem to remember some discussion of > diagnostic code slowing things down but assume this has been removed > in the tarball release). > > If not, what further diagnostics would be useful? > _______________________________________________ Discuss-gnustep mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnustep
