[PD] Does GEM need X-Server to be running

[Ingo Scherzinger]

Hi IOhannes,

> maybe it would be good to know what you want to achieve (or workaround)
> in the first place.

I only need to keep the resources as low as possible since I'm also running
a very heavy audio pd patch in parallel with GEM in a hardware like
environement. So I guess turning off all graphic processes using cpu will be
the best solution. Since the other (audio) patch is running with the
-nosleep flag I suppose the graphics cpu load will go to the other cpu
anyway in the first place.
While keeping GEM at fullscreen I guess the regular system can't be messed
around with because there is no access to the regular desktop.
That's completely ok with me. I simply wanted to figure out how to save the
maximum amount of resources and if it was possible to eliminate X-Server
completely.

Thank you for the information!
Ingo


> Ingo Scherzinger wrote:
> >>> Does GEM need X-Server to be running or does it connect directly to
the
> >>> graphic card?
> >>>
> >> whether you need an X-server, depends on your platform.
> >> on windows, Gem uses platform dependend code to create windows and to
> >> establish an openGL context.
> >> on X-platforms (linux, bsd, irix,...) it will use X/glx, so you will
> >> need an X-server somewhere to display (not necessarily the machine you
> >> are running Pd on).
> >> on OSX it will use Carbon/AGL.
> >> on w32 it will use windows/wgl.
> >>
> >> i don't know of any program that "directly connects to the graphics
> >> card" and still wants to do more than copying pixels into some legacy
> >> buffer.
> >
> > Sorry, I forgot to mention that I'm on Linux (Ubuntu 10.04).
> > I need to display the GEM window with the machine I'm running it on.
> > So that means I basically have to keep the system graphics turned on I
> > guess.
> 
> yes.
> butt after all, you want graphics, don't you? so why would you want to
> turn them off?
> get rid of your desktop environment and your window manager if you want
> to keep ressources low.
> 
> (maybe this is a misunderstanding? you don't want all the fancy wm and
> de stuff, when you talk about "system graphics" and "Xserver"? Gem
> doesn't need anything fancy, but it does need an Xserver.
> 
> the Xserver really only provides an abstracted interface to the gfx card
> (and to devices like mouse/keyboard), so your application doesn't need
> to know that it is talking to an "Intel Corporation Mobile 945GME
> Express Integrated Graphics Controller (rev 03)" or whatever card you
> have installed on your system. this is quite nice, as you don't need
> special binaries of Gem depending on your gfx card)
> 
> >
> >> Try pdp_xv or if it’s build pdp_sdl
> >
> > Would this allow me to turn the system graphics off and only display the
GEM
> > window?
> 
> pdp_xv creates an XVisual; the X already hints that you need an X-server.
> 
> the pdp_sdl should be able to work without X (depending on the SDL
> backends you have installed on your system; e.g. you might be able to
> output in AsciiArt)
> however, if you want to work with Gem (e.g. by using the gem2pdp bridge
> to display via pdp) you will still need to allow Gem to create a window,
> for which you need an Xserver.
> 
> 
> mfgasdr
> IOhannes
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
> 
> iEYEARECAAYFAkvtFy0ACgkQkX2Xpv6ydvRGzgCeOovKcJx9z6gqfcjpWrqb3afS
> 7nMAn17T0DoL/w00Ik/mK7303XQjjv0q
> =kyTQ
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----