On Tue, 14 Oct 2008, Jeremy Katz wrote:
On Mon, 2008-10-13 at 12:00 -0400, Ty wrote:
On Mon, 2008-10-13 at 21:24 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Steven Salevan wrote:
GNOME may indeed be more familiar to users, but what use is
familiarity if there's no functionality? At least XFCE can run
comfortably on the limited resources of the XO, allowing us to focus
on the issues that we can indeed address in the limited time we have.
What do you guys think?
Have you actually tested Xfce on XO to see if it performs better?
it performs a ton better, i followed these directions:
http://bc.tech.coop/blog/080130.html
... and congratulations, you've tested something which is entirely
different.
The big problem *ISN'T* GNOME vs XFCE. The problem is the (large) hit
we take on performance with squashfs decompression. So with the snap1
images, things have been changed a bit so that we can instead use the
ext3fs and take decompression out of it. Which makes an impressive
amount of difference
This implies that we need to make it *extremely* clear that people should
now be testing snap1 with the modified LiveCD tools, per the note that Mr.
Laska just sent to the list.
Is this right? If we all agree, we should probably make a ton of noise
about it to make sure that everyone is on the same page.
--g
--
fedora-test-list mailing list
fedora-test-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list
