Dan Espen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "Rouben Rostamian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > --- xli (or its alias xsetbg) ------- > > > > Advantages: > > > > o very fast > > o handles transparency > > o smooth background image transition without screen blanking > > > > Disadvantages: > > > > o does not recognize pgm, xpm, xbm, ... > > o too fussy; does not recognize certain types of jpg images > > I'm guessing you have progressive jpgs. I think you will be able > to find a patch to fix that.
I don't know what a progressive jpeg is. I will have to look it up. But here is an example of what I get: % file ciscosplace.jpg ciscosplace.jpg: JPEG image data, JFIF standard 1.01, resolution (DPI), 96 x 96 % xli ciscosplace.jpg jpegLoad: ciscosplace.jpg - Unsupported SOF marker type 0xc2 ciscosplace.jpg: unknown or unsupported image type Other viewers have no difficulty in displaying the image. I have several other jpeg files with the same problem. > > o poor quality smoothing > > I find -sm works pretty well. The -smooth option merely blurs the image. Applying -smooth multiple times, as the man page suggests, makes it even worse. A side-by-side comparison with what xv does with scaled images can be quite striking. > > o buggy: "xsetbg -fillscreen file.jpg" doesn't fill screen for some images > > Depends on the image size, some need -fill, others need -full. You are right. But it is not clear which images need which option. I experimented with images of varying aspect ratios, but gave up at the end. My apologies for this off-topic discussion. -- Rouben Rostamian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL: http://www.fvwm.org/>. To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To report problems, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
