On 10-01-05 09:19 -0800, darren kirby wrote: > quoth the Etaoin Shrdlu: > > I am browsing their site, and the screenshots look quite good. Is there > > anybody using it that can give an opinion? > > What are the advantages and disadvantages compared with a traditional X > > window system (eg, Xorg)? > > > > Thanks > > I have used directFB on a gentoo-based utility live cd I created to make it > more lightweight. This allows me to use links2 on the framebuffer, including > colour and images. I can even watch movies with mplayer on the framebuffer.
All of that can be done without DirectFB. The regular framebuffer is great, albeit a bit slow, not much slower than some X11 implementation though. > The fact that Xorg and all the libraries/files that come with it can be > omitted makes for a huge space savings on the cd. The cd has a _huge_ amount > of diagnostic/repair utilities on it...and of course some fluff (mplayer et > al.) ...and the image is only ~115MB Tried compiling Xorg with with minimal?, it seems to skip quite a lot of things you don't usually need. > As far as using this on a desktop...I don't think it is really a suitable > replacement for an actuall WM unless we are talking about a severely RAM > challanged machine. GNU Screen should be enough WM for everyone! -- (did ssmtp screw up my headers, should I set the option to no instead ;))
pgpLvisdAc3Fs.pgp
Description: PGP signature
