Subject: x-faq/speedup

From: Dominik Vogt <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1998 11:24:29 +0100

Recently I paged through a document called speedup-x-faq.txt
taht came with my Linuxand contains the following passage
(referring to memory usage):

Suggestions for your consideration:

  I used to recommend fvwm here, but the 2.x man page for fvwm
  now says: "Although it was redesigned to minimize memory consumption,
  it is now as bloated as any other window-manager. Users searching for
  a low-memory consumption window-manager are advised to look elsewhere,
  possibly to an earlier version of fvwm."
                [thanks to: Ian Thurlbeck ([email-masked]) ]

I don't believe anything like this has ever been in the manpage.
Comments?

Bye

Dominik
-- 
Dominik Vogt, Hewlett-Packard GmbH, Dept. BVS
Herrenberger Str.130, 71034 Boeblingen, Germany
phone: 07031/14-4596, fax: 07031/14-3883, [email-masked]
--
Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL:http://www.hpc.uh.edu/fvwm/>.
To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm-workers" in the
body of a message to [email-masked].
To report problems, send mail to [email-masked].

---

From: Dan Espen <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1998 08:11:02 -0500

> I don't believe anything like this has ever been in the manpage.

It certainly was in the  man page.  Whoever  removed it has my thanks.
Fvwm2 may not be the least bloated window manager around, but I always
felt that statement in the man page went too far.

I still feel fvwm2 achieves a pretty good balance between features and
resource usage.

--
Dan Espen                                Phone: (732) 699-5570
444 Hoes Lane  Room RRC 1C-214           E-mail: [email-masked]
Piscataway, NJ 08854
--
Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL:http://www.hpc.uh.edu/fvwm/>.
To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm-workers" in the
body of a message to [email-masked].
To report problems, send mail to [email-masked].

---

From: "Randall S. Winchester" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1998 09:50:25 -0500 (EST)

On Mon, 23 Nov 1998, Dan Espen wrote:

: Dominik Vogt <[email-masked]> writes:
:
: >   I used to recommend fvwm here, but the 2.x man page for fvwm
: >   now says: "Although it was redesigned to minimize memory consumption,
: >   it is now as bloated as any other window-manager. Users searching for
: >   a low-memory consumption window-manager are advised to look elsewhere,
: >   possibly to an earlier version of fvwm."
: >                 [thanks to: Ian Thurlbeck ([email-masked]) ]
: > 
: > I don't believe anything like this has ever been in the manpage.
: > Comments?
: 
: It certainly was in the  man page.  Whoever  removed it has my thanks.
: Fvwm2 may not be the least bloated window manager around, but I always
: felt that statement in the man page went too far.
: 
: I still feel fvwm2 achieves a pretty good balance between features and
: resource usage.

This is one of the niceties of the modules interface. You can limit bloat as
you see fit.

Randall

---

From: Dan Espen <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1998 09:55:29 -0500

"Randall S. Winchester" <[email-masked]> writes:
> This is one of the niceties of  the modules interface. You can limit
> bloat as you see fit.

Absolutely.

I wonder, if   you disabled every  optional  feature at compile  time,
(XPMs, mini-icons,   window shading,  gradients,  shapes,  etc..)  how
non-bloated fvwm2 would become.

Not that I think its necessary to try, I just think the old disclaimer
in the man page was way too self critical.