e in framebuffer?
Michael 'Mickey' Lauer
mickey at vanille-media.de
Wed Apr 29 13:15:46 CEST 2009
On Wednesday 29 April 2009 13:04:09 Tilman Baumann wrote:
> c_c wrote:
> > The thought came from the fact that QTE seems faster. So, if X was
> > removed
> > from the equation - how would the freerunner perform?
> I never felt a noticeable speed difference.
Well, I did some measurements on the GTA01 ages ago -- refer to
> > with e providing a
> > reasonable
> > windowing environment,
> Window management on plain framebuffer? Are you sure?
> I would be very interested in learning more about this.
> My expectation would be that you still need some fb multiplexer that needs
> to be relatively smart.
This solely depends on your usecase. If you're in for single-window-single-app
paradigm, combined with some clever logic to always show a panel, then you
don't really need window management.
> Probably by rendering into a shared mem that gets composed to a fb frame
> by some central daemon.
If you do that, you quickly reinvent X ;)
Seriously though, some projects have gone that way (evoak, picogui, ...), but
dropped the ball. If you really do need window managment, use X. If not, fb-
only could be a very viable alternative -- if only we had illume's
More information about the community