[ubuntu-x] Xorg.0.log timestamps

Tormod Volden lists.tormod at gmail.com
Mon Feb 9 17:09:04 GMT 2009

On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 5:04 PM, Bryce Harrington <bryce at canonical.com> wrote:
> Too bad Gnome boots so slow, do you have ideas / bug reports in on that?

It's a g_feature :) Seriously, I think it's a top-down problem,
conceptual, "we do it correct and
elegant-in-a-very-abstracted-informatics way, and the computer
hardware manufacturers will catch up in few years or generations". Ok,
my own taste is more hackish and ugly-optimized cause I am not a
programmer, or at the best an early 1980's programmer. The advantage
of this heavy infrastructure is they can easily program more advanced
stuff that adds to more slowness.

Now that I am ranting already: Many programmers are a bit too far away
from the users of their products, and don't realize that users
actually use (for instance) Gnome today for doing productive work.
Just an example (yes, I filed the bugs) is that I can not access our
FTP server with nautilus any longer (since the gvfs was unfolded on
us), and this has not been worked much on for soon a year - for what I
consider pretty normal functionality. Unfortunately the code is way
too abstract that I can help out with anything myself.

Is it reasonable that we should spend some 20ish MB on a printer
"applet" on a system that never saw a printer. (BTW this very applet
takes so long to load that it was recently modified to start delayed
in the gnome session - XP anyone?). Defenders would say most of the
20MB are shared - ok but with some other cruft. Even with a printer I
wouldn't need this applet loaded before I actually printed anything.
This was just an example, and this can be fixed and improved, but I
think it is the attitude that is wrong, that these things are
accepted, "oh it will only add a second" and "most users have 1GB" and
so on.

Of course, I love Gnome and use it on all computers I can.
Unfortunately it's getting unusable on older computers. Well, you all
understand I am just nostalgic and dreaming of the time where a full
productive desktop could be run in 8MB.

I am very glad to see optimization is enjoying a renaissance due to
netbooks and the growing awareness that users, against all recommended
practice, actually boot their linux computers.

> Yeah, this is a shame, and the one downside I see so far.  On the other
> hand, this will help in differentiating between error messages that
> appeared as part of the normal start up, vs. ones that occurred later on
> during usage.

Yes, that's very useful, I have always wondered if some given messages
came before I switched console or changed something and so on.


ps. sorry for all the off-topic, I have no blog.

More information about the Ubuntu-x mailing list