[lug] Linux Distr. Size (was: no fun with the sun)

[Jeff Howell]

Jim Buzbee wrote:
> 
> Centuries ago Nostradamus foresaw of a time when Michael J. Hammel would write:
> ...
> >
> >The X server (specifically AcceleratedX, but XFree86 should be similar)
> >reserve blocks of memory to speed screen refreshes (which is one reason
> >they appear so big under "top") but free that memory up when necessary.
> >
> ...
> 
> Another reason why the X server appears to be so big under "top" is that it can
> memory map the ram on the video board into its address space.  So if you have a
> 16 Meg video card, the XServer may map a good deal of that ram into its space
> making it appear as if it is a lot bigger (system ram wise) than it really is.
> 
> Jim

I'm really well aware of this, I was just basically saying non-gui uses less
resources than GUI.
That's why I used to fire up X without a window manager to run Quake3. I like my
'eyecandy'. That's 
why I'm running E and GNOME. After I upgraded RAM, I have a machine at home that
can take it without a performance hit.
Here at work with this fine machine they gave me, I don't have the CPU or RAM to
run E and GNOME.
So I run E without GNOME. The epplets now available replace most the
functionality I cared about in GNOME. I have no use for Drag 'n Drop and gmc
annoys me. If I wanted Windows I'd be running it :)
But I can see how those apps would ease the transition of a newbie into the
world and provide a groundwork for integrated apps.

But we can use what ever we want to. That's the whole point here eh? That's what
I pound into the heads of a lot of folks I have to deal with that really only
know about Linux from what they read on MS's website. They're coming around tho
:)

Anyways, enough preaching to the choir. Have a great afternoon!


-- 
 Jeff Howell
 EDS Unix Support
 
  Linux Slackware: The Ultimate NT Service Pack