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

[Ingo Scherzinger]

Thanx again, IOhannes!

I'll follow your suggestions about running X without desktop.

Ingo

> Ingo Scherzinger wrote:
> > 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.
> 
> well, the Xserver provides the infrastructure to access the gfx card.
> it doesn't do any graphic processing on it's own.
> 
> you could see the Xserver as the "kernel" of the gfx-subsystem (e.g. it
> handles the drivers for the gfx-cards)
> even though your audio patch needs all the ressources, you probably
> still want the kernel running...
> 
> 
> > 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.
> 
> again: X does not provide a desktop. (switch to console and become root;
> stop your desktop environment (something like "/etc/init.d/gdm stop" if
> you are running gnome; use kdm if you are running kde); start the
> X-server by simply running "X": that's the Xserver; you _can_ run Gem in
> this environment)
> 
> so there is nothing to mess around with.
> 
> > 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.
> 
> the Xserver will help you safe resources.
> 
> msar
> IOhannes
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
> 
> iEYEARECAAYFAkvtIqEACgkQkX2Xpv6ydvSNfgCdGQ5NDUGB9D1veLVqbq8f9H
> eU
> 6TgAn26GxePaYxtR+ptEinns532jWgeN
> =IJEq
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----