Hi IOhannes, > maybe it would be good to know what you want to achieve (or workaround) > in the first place.
I only need to keep the resources as low as possible since I'm also running a very heavy audio pd patch in parallel with GEM in a hardware like environement. So I guess turning off all graphic processes using cpu will be the best solution. Since the other (audio) patch is running with the -nosleep flag I suppose the graphics cpu load will go to the other cpu anyway in the first place. While keeping GEM at fullscreen I guess the regular system can't be messed around with because there is no access to the regular desktop. That's completely ok with me. I simply wanted to figure out how to save the maximum amount of resources and if it was possible to eliminate X-Server completely. Thank you for the information! Ingo > Ingo Scherzinger wrote: > >>> Does GEM need X-Server to be running or does it connect directly to the > >>> graphic card? > >>> > >> whether you need an X-server, depends on your platform. > >> on windows, Gem uses platform dependend code to create windows and to > >> establish an openGL context. > >> on X-platforms (linux, bsd, irix,...) it will use X/glx, so you will > >> need an X-server somewhere to display (not necessarily the machine you > >> are running Pd on). > >> on OSX it will use Carbon/AGL. > >> on w32 it will use windows/wgl. > >> > >> i don't know of any program that "directly connects to the graphics > >> card" and still wants to do more than copying pixels into some legacy > >> buffer. > > > > Sorry, I forgot to mention that I'm on Linux (Ubuntu 10.04). > > I need to display the GEM window with the machine I'm running it on. > > So that means I basically have to keep the system graphics turned on I > > guess. > > yes. > butt after all, you want graphics, don't you? so why would you want to > turn them off? > get rid of your desktop environment and your window manager if you want > to keep ressources low. > > (maybe this is a misunderstanding? you don't want all the fancy wm and > de stuff, when you talk about "system graphics" and "Xserver"? Gem > doesn't need anything fancy, but it does need an Xserver. > > the Xserver really only provides an abstracted interface to the gfx card > (and to devices like mouse/keyboard), so your application doesn't need > to know that it is talking to an "Intel Corporation Mobile 945GME > Express Integrated Graphics Controller (rev 03)" or whatever card you > have installed on your system. this is quite nice, as you don't need > special binaries of Gem depending on your gfx card) > > > > >> Try pdp_xv or if its build pdp_sdl > > > > Would this allow me to turn the system graphics off and only display the GEM > > window? > > pdp_xv creates an XVisual; the X already hints that you need an X-server. > > the pdp_sdl should be able to work without X (depending on the SDL > backends you have installed on your system; e.g. you might be able to > output in AsciiArt) > however, if you want to work with Gem (e.g. by using the gem2pdp bridge > to display via pdp) you will still need to allow Gem to create a window, > for which you need an Xserver. > > > mfgasdr > IOhannes > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) > Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org > > iEYEARECAAYFAkvtFy0ACgkQkX2Xpv6ydvRGzgCeOovKcJx9z6gqfcjpWrqb3afS > 7nMAn17T0DoL/w00Ik/mK7303XQjjv0q > =kyTQ > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
