[Wolves] What makes Gnome/KDE slow?

[Deusiah]

I second that, I can't help feeling there's something missing so I
have been playing about with this all last night looking at what
programs are started in Gnome and what programs I am missing.

A few more programs I started up that I was missing are
gnome-cups-icon (for the nice printing top bar icon) and the
update-notifier (for the update-notifier icon). So far so good no
performance hit from those, also there is evolution-alarm-notify when
I tried to start this up it couldn't find the command so it's a
process started some other way. I don't actually use Evolution so I
didn't bother to find out how it was started.

gnome-smproxy was missing also so I started that up and my system
gradually started to slow, I closed it and it was fast again. I have
just started it back up and everything is still as fast so perhaps it
was a false alarm or perhaps it's accumulates something that slows it
down? I'll report what happens later.

I would love to hear from someone else who has tried this and hear was
results you get. There are a few downsides with this as you get a few
functions replaced with the XFCE ones like alt+tab switching, the
logout menu and the run menu. Apart from that the
gnome-session-manager program fails to start so you must use the XFCE
session manager also the gnome theme manager is redundant and so you
must use the XFCE theme manager. All in all it's a very usable XFCE
hybrid. The downsides in my opinion are minor and easily made up for
by the speed.

Chris

On 5/18/05, Stuart Langridge <stuart.langridge at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5/17/05, Deusiah <deusiah at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I just this second tried this on my desktop machine (Athlon 64 3200+)
> > again great results! The terminal now pops open in an instant :)
> >
> > Before I did this I timed how long Gnome takes to start up including
> > all the time the icons take to start not just till the desktop
> > appears, it took 26 seconds in total. Gnome on top of XFCE takes 11
> > seconds.
> >
> > Am I on to something here or is there some major part of Gnome I have
> > forgotten to start? Performance like this usually only comes at a
> > price.
> 
> Hm.
> 
> I am forced to believe that there is something you've forgotten to
> start, but I don't know what it is. Unless you've just discovered the
> way to make Gnome fast, which would be bloody great. Try individually
> switching in each of the components you've removed and see which it is
> that slows everything down? Also try starting Gnome programs and see
> if they take a lot longer to start up (because they are starting the
> bits you forgot).
> 
> This could be a real breakthrough, this :)
> 
> Aq.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Wolves LUG mailing list
> Homepage: http://www.wolveslug.org.uk/
> Mailing list: Wolves at mailman.lug.org.uk
> Mailing list home: http://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/wolves
>