Ethan Blanton nawypisowywa³(a): > The point is that the memory consumed here is not consumed by either > the FvwmPager text (that is, executable data) itself or the minimal > bookkeeping required to load a second instance of the program. It was > probably the actual run-time data required by each FvwmPager in order > to do its job -- this data is not likely to change significantly > whether each FvwmPager loads its own text or operates out of the same > text. It is possible that some of this data could be shared between > multiple pagers running out of the same process ... it is also > possible that handling the contention for this sharing would > sufficiently complicate and enlarge the FvwmPager binary that the > _common_ case (one pager per X session) would actually use more > resources.
I understand. But even so, something still seems wrong. Why is a module like FvwmPager using so much memory? > I think you'll find that this is not a large issue. Well, a couple of megs, making fvwm one of the bigger WM's. I wanted to get the words "negligible for a desktop system" - to show that adding an perl/python/scheme/whatever interpreter would have no real influence on memory performance - it would be like running another FvwmIconMan. -- Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL:http://www.fvwm.org/>. To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm-workers" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To report problems, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
