Re: do we really need xrdb?
James Henstridge wrote: The question was: if gcc has already been paged in (e.g. by a prior xrdb call), does this change provide any noticeable benefit? No, it doesn't. The previous discussions seemed to indicate that the largest performance wins would come from not paging gcc in at all, which will only happen if either (a) all xrdb calls use -nocpp or (b) xrdb uses a different C preprocessor. That's right. xrdb is already called by the X session startup scripts, and that's where you take the startup time penalty (because you have to page in cpp). So even if you removed xrdb completely from GNOME startup, you wouldn't gain anything. The right approach is to tell xrdb to use a lightweight cpp, such as mcpp or tcpp (although I don't know if tcc has an option to preprocess only without compiling). There is a patch in freedesktop.org bug 4325 to use other preprocessors by default if they're available at runtime, but the only feedback I got on that was that xrdb should detect the preprocessor at compile time instead of at runtime, which seems worse to me since if you then uninstall that processor your xrdb breaks completely. https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4325 Any suggestions? Cheers, Lorenzo ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: do we really need xrdb?
On Mon, 2005-10-17 at 11:54 -0500, Federico Mena Quintero wrote: On Mon, 2005-10-17 at 17:32 +0100, Ross Burton wrote: Using a smaller CPP and delaying xrdb's execution until everything else is started is the right solution here. You need to run xrdb before gnome-session (re)starts any Motif apps, for example. I've just sent a patch (http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnomecc-list/2005-October/msg00024.html) for using -nocpp where possible. I was also trying to run the other xrdb command (which reads ~/.Xresources and all other appropriate files) in a 10/15 seconds timeout, but since you say we need to run it before any motif app is started (which can be started as part of the session, so we need to run xrdb ASAP). Anyway, gdm already runs xrdb with the user's .Xresources and other system-wide files, from what I have seen. So, maybe we don't need that other xrdb command? -- Rodrigo Moya [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: do we really need xrdb?
On Tue, 2005-10-18 at 13:16 +0200, Rodrigo Moya wrote: I've just sent a patch (http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnomecc-list/2005-October/msg00024.html) for using -nocpp where possible. Cool, that will help. I was also trying to run the other xrdb command (which reads ~/.Xresources and all other appropriate files) in a 10/15 seconds timeout, but since you say we need to run it before any motif app is started (which can be started as part of the session, so we need to run xrdb ASAP). As was said, just running it between the core desktop and the user tasks would be best, but that isn't possible with the current session manager as I understand it. Anyway, gdm already runs xrdb with the user's .Xresources and other system-wide files, from what I have seen. So, maybe we don't need that other xrdb command? gdm doesn't generate defines from the GTK+ theme and read the .ad files in /etc/gnome/config and ~/.gnome2/xrdb, it only loads ~/.Xresources and the static files in /etc/X11/. Ross -- Ross Burton mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www: http://www.burtonini.com./ PGP Fingerprint: 1A21 F5B0 D8D0 CFE3 81D4 E25A 2D09 E447 D0B4 33DF signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: do we really need xrdb?
Rodrigo Moya wrote: I've just sent a patch (http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnomecc-list/2005-October/msg00024.html) for using -nocpp where possible. Given the problems mentioned before with parsing Xresources without a cpp, is this actually worth it? From previous messages, I was under the impression that the main slowdown came from paging gcc into memory. Changing some, but not all, invocations to not run the C preprocessor wouldn't affect that. A patch to change all xrdb invocations to xrdb -cpp /path/to/a/small/cpp would probably provide better results without the compatibility problems. James. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: do we really need xrdb?
On Tue, 2005-10-18 at 20:01 +0800, James Henstridge wrote: I've just sent a patch (http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnomecc-list/2005-October/msg00024.html) for using -nocpp where possible. Given the problems mentioned before with parsing Xresources without a cpp, is this actually worth it? The locations where CPP was removed don't need to do any pre-processing, as they merge in a generated string and not .Xresources. Ross -- Ross Burton mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www: http://www.burtonini.com./ PGP Fingerprint: 1A21 F5B0 D8D0 CFE3 81D4 E25A 2D09 E447 D0B4 33DF ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: do we really need xrdb?
Ross Burton wrote: On Tue, 2005-10-18 at 20:01 +0800, James Henstridge wrote: I've just sent a patch (http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnomecc-list/2005-October/msg00024.html) for using -nocpp where possible. Given the problems mentioned before with parsing Xresources without a cpp, is this actually worth it? The locations where CPP was removed don't need to do any pre-processing, as they merge in a generated string and not .Xresources. The question was: if gcc has already been paged in (e.g. by a prior xrdb call), does this change provide any noticeable benefit? The previous discussions seemed to indicate that the largest performance wins would come from not paging gcc in at all, which will only happen if either (a) all xrdb calls use -nocpp or (b) xrdb uses a different C preprocessor. James. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: do we really need xrdb?
On Mon, 2005-10-17 at 22:31, Alan Cox wrote: On Llu, 2005-10-17 at 13:18 +0200, Rodrigo Moya wrote: Hi One of the best improvements we've seen while working on speeding up the GNOME startup time has been the removal of the xsettings thing, via xrdb -merge execution. Make xrdb use decus cpp and it takes basically zero time. Trivial fix and doesn't break anything. Decus CPP is pd And how about just inserting suitable calls to XChangeProperty() friends directly in gnome-session ? Beats a sytem() anytime. Xav ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
do we really need xrdb?
Hi One of the best improvements we've seen while working on speeding up the GNOME startup time has been the removal of the xsettings thing, via xrdb -merge execution. Ben Kahn came up with a list of apps that still need this: acroread 5 Emacs Anything written in Tk (aMSN, crossover office, much corporate custom software) Anything written in Motif (slowly being replaced, but still a lot of software) Anything written in XForms (oddly, a lot of scientific software...) Apps that ship with the X server: xterm, xedit, xclock, etc. Anything else? So, do we really want to keep around the xrdb thing in gnome-settings-daemon? -- Rodrigo Moya [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: do we really need xrdb?
quote who=Rodrigo Moya So, do we really want to keep around the xrdb thing in gnome-settings-daemon? How about an off-by-default GConf key? Lots of workstation deployments I know about really benefit from the xrdb stuff (heaps of motif and xforms). - Jeff -- Ubuntu USA Europe Tour: Oct-Nov 2005http://wiki.ubuntu.com/3BT Instead you're doing circle jerks with the Care Bears of Censorship. - Siduri on Slashdot ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: do we really need xrdb?
On Mon, 2005-10-17 at 13:18 +0200, Rodrigo Moya wrote: acroread 5 Emacs Anything written in Tk (aMSN, crossover office, much corporate custom software) Anything written in Motif (slowly being replaced, but still a lot of software) Anything written in XForms (oddly, a lot of scientific software...) Apps that ship with the X server: xterm, xedit, xclock, etc. Anything else? All X software which isn't written in GTK+ or Qt. So, do we really want to keep around the xrdb thing in gnome-settings-daemon? Yes, really. Lots of people use Emacs and this is responsible for making it not stand out like a sore thumb. How about a check box in Prefences-Theme, [X] Apply colour theme to legacy applications? Ross -- Ross Burton mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www: http://www.burtonini.com./ PGP Fingerprint: 1A21 F5B0 D8D0 CFE3 81D4 E25A 2D09 E447 D0B4 33DF ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: do we really need xrdb?
On Mon, 2005-10-17 at 13:18 +0200, Rodrigo Moya wrote: One of the best improvements we've seen while working on speeding up the GNOME startup time has been the removal of the xsettings thing, via xrdb -merge execution. Oh, as the settings can be applied at any time in the startup, has anyone tried moving the xrdb invocation to be the last thing, after the Panel and Nautilus have been started? Ross -- Ross Burton mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www: http://www.burtonini.com./ PGP Fingerprint: 1A21 F5B0 D8D0 CFE3 81D4 E25A 2D09 E447 D0B4 33DF ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: do we really need xrdb?
On Mon, 2005-10-17 at 13:16 +0100, Ross Burton wrote: On Mon, 2005-10-17 at 13:18 +0200, Rodrigo Moya wrote: One of the best improvements we've seen while working on speeding up the GNOME startup time has been the removal of the xsettings thing, via xrdb -merge execution. Oh, as the settings can be applied at any time in the startup, has anyone tried moving the xrdb invocation to be the last thing, after the Panel and Nautilus have been started? will try this next,although I first wanted to consolidate all xrdb calls (3 places) into one only. -- Rodrigo Moya [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: do we really need xrdb?
On Mon, 2005-10-17 at 13:41 +0200, Jeff Waugh wrote: quote who=Rodrigo Moya So, do we really want to keep around the xrdb thing in gnome-settings-daemon? How about an off-by-default GConf key? Lots of workstation deployments I know about really benefit from the xrdb stuff (heaps of motif and xforms). Why do we always assume large-scale workstation deployments with sysadmins who have time to dig through GConf keys and set different defaults? Speaking as somebody employed by a Motif-app-producing ISV, (but not speaking on behalf of said ISV, blah blah blah), I'm telling you that all the people out there using Motif and Tk software aren't doing so because they're ubergeeks who like to dig through gconf-editor. These are average people, the sorts of folks who have to have their children help them with email. -- Shaun ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: do we really need xrdb?
Le lundi 17 octobre 2005 à 09:32 -0600, Elijah Newren a écrit : we could achieve the same benefit by just calling xrdb with the -nocpp We tried that before Ubuntu 5.10 and had some issues: https://bugzilla.ubuntu.com/show_bug.cgi?id=14268 Cheers, Sebastien Bacher ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: do we really need xrdb?
On Mon, 2005-10-17 at 17:32 +0100, Ross Burton wrote: Using a smaller CPP and delaying xrdb's execution until everything else is started is the right solution here. You need to run xrdb before gnome-session (re)starts any Motif apps, for example. Federico ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: do we really need xrdb?
On Llu, 2005-10-17 at 13:18 +0200, Rodrigo Moya wrote: Hi One of the best improvements we've seen while working on speeding up the GNOME startup time has been the removal of the xsettings thing, via xrdb -merge execution. Make xrdb use decus cpp and it takes basically zero time. Trivial fix and doesn't break anything. Decus CPP is pd ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
