xfrun4 + dbus

[Edscott Wilson Garcia]

On Thu, 2 Feb 2006, Benedikt Meurer wrote:

> Jani Monoses wrote:
>> Ok, so there are two approaches so far:
>>
>> 1) patch existing xfrun to optionally use dbus and if no service is
>> detected behave exactly as now. This needs minimal changes as seen in
>> the patch above. However the advantages only show up when some app
>> implements said service.
>>
>> 2) make an xfrun-backround process with all the current code, and add a
>> new small process which just calls it. The disadvantage I see here is
>> dbus dependency is no longer optional for this feature and needs two
>> extra apps besides xfrun itself.
>>
>> both of these will make the run dialog pop up almost instantly so I am
>> fine with putting a patch in bugzilla for either of these approaches.
>
> I'd prefer 2) because it's less hacky, but 1) would be ok as quick&dirty
> work-around for 4.4. We can do 2) for 4.6 then.
>

I'm with Benny. The main complaint with xfrun is the slow startup time 
(happens when the dynamic libraries have been swapped to disk, like 
when the system updates the slocate database every night). Keeping a process running 
solves this.

I would not be worried about having more processes on the go. If Intel is 
not lying about the architecture they have in mind, speed will be accomplished by 
parallelizing processes instead of optimizing serialization.

regards,