[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-devel
Subject:    Re: Memory consumption in KDE 2.0
From:       Stephan Kulow <coolo () itm ! mu-luebeck ! de>
Date:       1999-05-03 11:09:00
[Download RAW message or body]

Waldo Bastian wrote:
> 
> Martin Jones wrote:
> > > But that's no answer to Dirk's question and I think he has a point here.
> > > Klock should be the X screensaver and start the real one (dlopening)
> > > when
> > > X starts the screensaver. We planned that for way too long :(
> >
> > I'm interested in doing this.  What is the status of dlopen support
> > on various platforms?  Wasn't support for various platforms what
> > prevented us from doing this earlier.
> 
> Would this take of the problem? Loading/unloading a library does not
> free
> up the memory of the process /me thinks.
> 
> Forking when activated and killing the child when deactivated would.
> 
> However, it would probably be easier just to start the screensaver
> when it needs to be activated and terminating it when deactivated.
> What's the drawback of that?
> 
You can combine both! I can't see why you shouldn't. I think currently
the screensaver is activated by a signal. But we agree that it shouldn't
be in memory as long as no screensaver is active, but only a very small
wrapper.

Greetings, Stephan

-- 
As long as Linux remains a religion of freeware fanatics,
Microsoft have nothing to worry about.  
                       By Michael Surkan, PC Week Online

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]