> This sounds like it could lead to an incomplete and unstable X?
> Wouldn't it be possible that there are libs or binaries that are not
> needed for startup but might be called later? As an analogy, I can
> build a car that can start up and run without any brake system but I
> don't think I'd take it for a test drive.
What you are saying is not wrong but you can run the
application that you want to run on X and test it for various
possibilities and add the necessary things if required. That is how
you can make it stable. But the procedure that I followed is the
fastest one.
> Wouldn't tinyX be better suited than trying to pare X down? I believe
> there are other graphic display tools available that are much smaller
> than X depending on the functionality you need. Yes, X is big, but it
> also does quite a lot.
Actually I'm using the frame buffer server where as the tiny x
uses svga server which is not suitable for my application. Ya there
are tools like nano-X but if the application is ment for X its in vain
trying them.
Thanks and Regds,
PR
_______________________________________________
Xpert mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xpert
