Lee Jenkins wrote:
> I'm playing around with the fpWeb stuff and it looks really good. I may use
> it
> for some work on my company's website but I wanted to make sure that I could
> use
> either cgi or apache dso.
>
> Are there any examples for apache shared modules or is it pretty much th
I'm playing around with the fpWeb stuff and it looks really good. I may use it
for some work on my company's website but I wanted to make sure that I could
use
either cgi or apache dso.
Are there any examples for apache shared modules or is it pretty much the same
as the CGI? I see they b
On Wed, 21 Jan 2009 16:11:53 +0100
Hans-Peter Diettrich wrote:
> Mattias Gaertner schrieb:
>
> >> [...]
> >>> Yes, options are possible. But I have no idea how Java or any
> >>> others layout manager works. Maybe Mattias will help you here.
> >> The question is: what interface will be required?
Mattias Gaertner schrieb:
>> [...]
>>> Yes, options are possible. But I have no idea how Java or any
>>> others layout manager works. Maybe Mattias will help you here.
>> The question is: what interface will be required? The TDockManager
>> class was given by Delphi, for layout managers we may hav
null
On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 8:11 PM, wrote:
> "Let's be honest here: current versions of both GNOME and KDE are quite
> slower than XP UI.
>
> It always felt a bit slower - what I and many others assumed to be
> caused by the X architeture or lack of hardware acceleration - but
> benchmarks see
Dear Leslie ,
I am also studying many Linux , FreeBSD , Solaris , OpenSolaris
distributions
to find an easily usable one with the condition that my program when
becomes ready
can be run on it as attached to a network .
I bought more than 10 hard disks with a smallest ( GigaByte / price )
"Let's be honest here: current versions of both GNOME and KDE are quite
slower than XP UI.
It always felt a bit slower - what I and many others assumed to be
caused by the X architeture or lack of hardware acceleration - but
benchmarks seemed to differ.
Anyway "Linux" UI performance has been on a
On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 1:20 PM, Bernd Mueller wrote:
> c...@freemail.hu wrote:
>> Thanks for the answers and suggestions everyone!
>>
>> The speed issue I have is that simple things, like popup menues, clicking on
>> tabs of a pagecontrol, changing tasks ...almost everything is handled too
>> sl
Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
>
> I run Windows 2000 under a VMWare in linux, and it is dog slow.
Try VirtualBox ;-)
> I think we are more measuring the speed of VMWare and their drivers
> than the actual guest OS.
you may be right, in VirtualBox you have to install the so called "Guest
Addition
On Wed, 21 Jan 2009, Bernd Mueller wrote:
> c...@freemail.hu wrote:
> > Thanks for the answers and suggestions everyone!
> >
> > The speed issue I have is that simple things, like popup menues, clicking
> > on
> > tabs of a pagecontrol, changing tasks ...almost everything is handled too
> >
c...@freemail.hu wrote:
> Thanks for the answers and suggestions everyone!
>
> The speed issue I have is that simple things, like popup menues, clicking on
> tabs of a pagecontrol, changing tasks ...almost everything is handled too
> slowly. Compared to what I am used to, the delay is quite dis
Thanks for the answers and suggestions everyone!
The speed issue I have is that simple things, like popup menues, clicking on
tabs of a pagecontrol, changing tasks ...almost everything is handled too
slowly. Compared to what I am used to, the delay is quite disturbing. The
other kind of slow
On Wed, 21 Jan 2009 14:11:53 +0100
Hans-Peter Diettrich wrote:
>[...]
> > Yes, options are possible. But I have no idea how Java or any
> > others layout manager works. Maybe Mattias will help you here.
>
> The question is: what interface will be required? The TDockManager
> class was given by D
Paul Ishenin schrieb:
> Lets start with a new unit. Then we will see if we need our own
> LazDockTree or we will replace it with yours.
ok
> Nice idea. Really dock header can be a splitter and a header at one
> moment. If we use 2 controls they will be anyway placed one by one.
At the moment
Hans-Peter Diettrich wrote:
> The question is, how to proceed. Should I provide a new Lazarus unit, as
> an alternative for LDockTree, or should I update LDockTree and Controls
> and submit an patch? Be warned: my implementation changes fields,
> methods and properties of TDockZone, and also pa
Now I've got an own docking manager work, with D7. The implementation
addresses the zone management and sizes, which are flawed in LDockTree
(TLazDockTree, TLazDockZone).
The question is, how to proceed. Should I provide a new Lazarus unit, as
an alternative for LDockTree, or should I update LD
16 matches
Mail list logo
