Tiny Core Extensions > TCE Corepure64
Enable our Xfbdev?
labeas:
TC64's default of using Xfbdev, seems to work well.
Also considering that X11 is known to be a monster, I'm resisiting
installing it to replace our Xfbdev.
Recent decades' evolution of internet has degenerated from <where to
get info> to <how to avoid being swamped by garbage>. Ie. the vulgar
html has replaced all other protocols.
Compared to common "graphical-browsers", our `links` is brilliant for
serious collecting and storing info/knowledge -- in contrast to the.
childish/animal-like "reach out for what you want WHEN you want it".
For times that one needs graphical images, our `opera-12` is quite
good [but its mail & NNTP setup is very complex].
I'd like to understand how opera-12 manages with Xfbdev ?
On a previous non TC installation, I remember that links?links2?elinks
was able to render graphical images in consol/VT-mode. Amazingly !!
I can't remember if it handled [? Latex] Math formulae?
Currently: `links -g` == "Graphics not enabled when compiling".
Have any TC-users knowledge of graphics rendering in VT-mode
eg. links/links2/elinks VT graphical operation?
=========================
Being located in the 3rd [going 4th] world, I can't rely on TC's
main idea: "don't bother to keep your own executable-files, just
just grab then off the cloud".
========
PS. How does the brilliant-app `wily` also run on Xfbdev, surely
designed for X11 ?
I've got a related [to wily] 32bit killer-app which runs under X11;
how should I experiment to see if/how to port it to TC64.
It is related to the 32bit LinuxNativeOberon which runs nicely,
for Framebuffer setup, on TC64:VT-mode.
It's confusing that/how 32bit LinuxNativeOberon runs on TC64, with
good font-sizes ...etc.
Juanito:
--- Quote from: labeas on January 05, 2018, 09:30:25 PM ---I've got a related [to wily] 32bit killer-app which runs under X11;
how should I experiment to see if/how to port it to TC64.
--- End quote ---
Grab the source code and compile it on CorePure64 using the instructions in the extension making section of the wiki.
Rich:
Hi labeas
--- Quote from: labeas on January 05, 2018, 09:30:25 PM ---TC64's default of using Xfbdev, seems to work well.
Also considering that X11 is known to be a monster, I'm resisiting
installing it to replace our Xfbdev.
--- End quote ---
I'd like to put that section of your statement that I highlighted in bold to the test. I'm presuming you are referring to memory
or CPU usage. My primary and lowest spec machine is an 800 Mhz 686 processor with 512 MB of RAM. Here is the output from top:
--- Code: ---top - 10:02:10 up 358 days, 22:46, 2 users, load average: 0.00, 0.01, 0.05
Tasks: 319 total, 1 running, 318 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie
Cpu(s): 3.6%us, 2.0%sy, 0.0%ni, 94.4%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si, 0.0%st
Mem: 512180k total, 489296k used, 22884k free, 30840k buffers
Swap: 1047548k total, 75312k used, 972236k free, 162728k cached
PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND
3752 tc 20 0 234m 189m 16m S 3.6 37.8 46:56.84 opera-11
3747 tc 20 0 21044 12m 9220 S 0.0 2.5 0:37.56 sylpheed
9692 root 20 0 55176 10m 3140 S 0.3 2.2 1923:54 Xorg
25162 tc 20 0 19764 8208 6168 S 0.0 1.6 15:59.74 geany
9732 tc 20 0 6964 3236 1424 S 0.0 0.6 13:34.91 wbar
4468 tc 20 0 3232 1444 1136 S 0.3 0.3 0:01.27 aterm
20791 tc 20 0 3628 1276 1120 S 0.0 0.2 0:02.06 aterm
9720 tc 20 0 4792 1220 992 S 0.0 0.2 12:01.97 flwm_topside
19187 tc 20 0 3496 1164 1008 S 0.0 0.2 0:06.44 aterm
--- End code ---
At 2.2% Xorg is consuming even less memory than my Email clients 2.5%, hardly a monster.
Since you are running 64 bits I would think your hardware is far more capable than what I'm running, though I would be curious
about your hardwares specs. If you still feel that Xorg is to big a load for your hardware to handle, Xvesa has a smaller
footprint.
--- Quote ---Being located in the 3rd [going 4th] world, I can't rely on TC's
main idea: "don't bother to keep your own executable-files, just
just grab then off the cloud".
--- End quote ---
OK, all you did here is cherry pick one line from the "Modes of Operation" section of the http://tinycorelinux.net/concepts.html
page while ignoring the rest of the content. If you continue to the section titled "The Mount Mode of Operation: TCE/Install"
(only another 2 paragraphs down) it clearly states:
--- Quote --- This is the most widely used and recommended method for using Tiny Core.
See an overview of the system architecture of this mode.
In Mount Mode:
Applications are stored locally in a directory named tce on a persistent store, .e..g, a supported disk partition (ext2,ext3.ext4,vfat, or fat)
Applications are optionally mounted on reboot (see onboot.lst in forum and wiki).
Mounting applications saves RAM for other uses.
--- End quote ---
PDP-8:
xfbdev is bad news for my box...
On my lower end 64-bit box, (1.3ghz dual-core / 4g ram) xfbdev is almost unusable. Well, it is if you don't drag any windows around. The i910 driver didn't make any difference.
Made me wonder if fltk had a wireframe-drag option that might relieve that issue. If I have to move a window around, the only sane way to do it is to roll it up, move the roll, and unroll it in place.
The only solution was to go to xorg, which to me is not as light as possibly Xvesa, especially since I'm really happy with fltk and an xterm. I have other heavyweight boxes for multimedia entertainment, so I don't dedicate TC to that duty.
However, because of my lightweight needs for TC on that box, I just went to the 32-bit release which does use (or make available) Xvesa.
That's what I love about TC - I can work it around nearly any issue! :)
Rich:
Hi PDP-8
--- Quote from: PDP-8 on January 06, 2018, 09:48:50 PM ---On my lower end 64-bit box, (1.3ghz dual-core / 4g ram) xfbdev is almost unusable ....
The only solution was to go to xorg, which to me is not as light as possibly Xvesa, ...
--- End quote ---
With those specs, I wouldn't think Xorg should be a problem. Regarding Xvesa, I found this:
--- Quote from: curaga on February 07, 2016, 02:35:26 AM ---
--- Quote ---Forgot to ask: Why no xvesa for 64bit?
--- End quote ---
It's not possible to execute VESA bios calls in 64-bit mode. Xorg's vesa driver has an emulator, so it is able to do it nowadays.
Also, your understanding of the lists is correct. The ISOs just have a different setup you'd usually have.
--- End quote ---
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version