Re: [proposal] Decrease X.org XFree86 server footprint


Mike Frysinger <vapier.adi@...>
 

On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 14:38, Tim Bird wrote:
Mikhail Gusarov wrote:
Proposer: Mikhail Gusarov

Summary: Decrease X.org XFree86 server footprint
...
The only one major obstacle of adopting XFree86 for embedded needs is
large memory footprint. While Kdrive Xfbdev features ~1.75MB RSS,
XFree86 is nearly 20MB.
Thanks very much for this proposal!

The size of X is something that's been an issue with embedded devices
for some time.  I'm not a graphics guy, so I didn't even know about
Kdrive.

Can anyone comment on the current state of affairs
for the graphics layer used on embedded devices?

Is X widely used, or are other graphics systems (like DirectFB,
for example) used?

At Sony we're not shipping a lot of (any?) products with X, but if
the footprint problem was solved maybe we would consider it.
it would be more widely used if the footprint wasnt so awful. most
people will take simple convenience over extended software
development, and the closer you match the desktop system, the better.
ive seen people leverage nano-x/microwindows for this reason as it
provides nxlib -- X11 glue to its display server.
-mike

Join Celinux-dev@lists.celinuxforum.org to automatically receive all group messages.