On Wed, 3 Nov 2004, Michael Hamilton wrote: > Yes I am using startx. I am using a relatively fast 1gig Compact Flash > (still slower than a hard drive though) and a ricoh EB1 1.4Ghz > Processor. It might just be the time it takes to read the flash. That stuff's pretty slow. But with 512 Meg of ram, I'd expect it to be considerably faster the second time you started the server. > 512 megs of ram. The ramdisk is 12 megs and loads the root file system > and some libraries specific to our application. I contemplated putting X > in ramdisk but then ramdisk would be massive. Is there an alternative to > starting x without using startx? Again I am using TWM, which doesn't > have very good documentation. It's possible that it is slow as well. startx is OK and twm is pretty lightweight. I suggest just starting "XFree86" to see if that comes up faster (quit with <ctrl><alt><bkspc>). If XFree86 isn't faster than startx, then startx is off the hook. If you run XFree86, quit and then run XFree86 again and it comes up very much faster the second time then that implies that the flash is slow. Mark. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Mark Vojkovich [mailto:mvojkovi@xxxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2004 5:49 PM > To: xfree86@xxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: RE: X on embedded Systems > > Are you using startx? If so, is it faster when running XFree86 > directly without any clients? > > I can't recall ever seeing X start up so slowly. How fast > is this CPU? Does this system have a disk drive? If so, are > you using DMA? My first instinct would be that this is a disk > problem or you're starting more than you think you're starting. > Which XFree86 driver is this? > > > Mark. > > On Tue, 2 Nov 2004, Michael Hamilton wrote: > > > We use twm as our windows manager and X starts up and the X sits there > > for ages before an xterm or anything can start up. It's about 10 > seconds > > (consistently). > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Mark Vojkovich [mailto:mvojkovi@xxxxxxxxxxx] > > Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2004 4:05 PM > > To: xfree86@xxxxxxxxxxx > > Subject: Re: X on embedded Systems > > > > Is starting X a performance problem for you? Without a window > > manager it's only takes a second for XFree86 to start over here. > > I thought this was fairly quick already. > > > > Mark. > > > > On Tue, 2 Nov 2004, Michael Hamilton wrote: > > > > > Can you make any suggestions on making X start up faster (or appear > > to) > > > on an embedded system? I have already tried tweaking the font > > situation > > > (loading them with fontpath rather than the font server). Is it > > possible > > > to preload X somehow before the UI comes up, perhaps early in system > > > startup or in parallel with other programs? > > > > > > Thanks for any suggestions. > > > -M > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > XFree86 mailing list > > > XFree86@xxxxxxxxxxx > > > http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86 > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > XFree86 mailing list > > XFree86@xxxxxxxxxxx > > http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86 > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > XFree86 mailing list > > XFree86@xxxxxxxxxxx > > http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86 > > > _______________________________________________ > XFree86 mailing list > XFree86@xxxxxxxxxxx > http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86 > > > _______________________________________________ > XFree86 mailing list > XFree86@xxxxxxxxxxx > http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86 > _______________________________________________ XFree86 mailing list XFree86@xxxxxxxxxxx http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
