Re: [gentoo-user] running X at nice -10
On Thu, 2003-02-06 at 13:47, gabor wrote:
> and now back to the topic:
> IS GIVING A HIGHER PRIORITY TO X A GOOD IDEA OR NOT ?
I can't say whether it is, or not. But, I can say that I already do.
Doesn't really seem to make any real difference tho, but I never really
had a problem before (or they were so random and rare it's nigh on
impossible to say).
Someone posted this a while ago, what I use now, works perfectly.
/* wrapper.c
* Casey Cain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
*
* This is a quick hack that starts X with a priority
* of -10 for increased responsiveness. It should work
* but it may not :) There is no warranty or anything.
* Although I can't see anything possibly going wrong as
* there's only about 3 lines of code, worst case you
* have to reinstall X. Basically, you should never run
* code that you don't understand. That said:
*
* To use this program, verify that /usr/X11R6/bin/X is
* really a symlink to /usr/X11R6/bin/XFree86 (the actual
* server binary) If not, then change the *app to point to
* the actual binary.
* At the console (be careful..no typos):
* kill X and anything X-related (ie: xdm, kdm)
* $ gcc wrapper.c -o XFree86.wrapper
* $ su
* $ cp XFree86.wrapper /usr/X11R6/bin
* $ cd /usr/X11R6/bin
* $ ls -alk X (make sure its a symlink..if not STOP)
* $ rm X
* $ chown root.root XFree86.wrapper
* $ chmod u+s XFree86.wrapper
* $ ln -s XFree86.wrapper X
* $ exit
*
* You should now be able to startx or xdm or whatever.
* Open an xterm and run 'top'. The process XFree86
* (which is the server) should be running at nice -10.
*
* If not, then make sure the XFree86.wrapper is suid
* root, executable by all, owned by root, and pointed
* to by /usr/X11R6/bin/X.
*
* To revert is easy.
* $ su
* $ cd /usr/X11R6/bin
* $ rm X
* $ ln -s XFree86 X
* $ exit
*/
#include
#include
#include
#include
#include
const char *app = "/usr/X11R6/bin/XFree86"; // the actual binary
const int root = 0; // root's uid
const int n = -10;// desired nice priority valid range -20..20.
int main(int argc, char **argv)
{
seteuid(root);// The X server must be started as root under any
Linux
nice(n); // Makes it nice
execv(app, argv); // This is it!
/* Should never see this unless *app points to invalid binary */
fprintf(stderr, "Failed to execv %s with nice value of %d\n", app, n);
exit(1);
}
--
Mike Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-user] running X at nice -10
Felix Rodriguez wrote: The only stupid question is the one you don't ask. Exactly! During my time in the Canadian military, if you messed up or showed total lack of knowledge in any field, you could bet your boots that you would be giving the next course on whatever that may be. In a sense, this seems to be what most on this list are bound to without explicidly being told to do so. As we ask our questions (sometimes getting stupid answers or ignorant rants) we learn, yet at the same time are teaching others who perhaps didn't know that wasn't working because of something they had /hadn"t done. Step by step each of us learn more about Linux, specifically Gentoo. Soon most of us will be able to exclaim with confidence right after an upgrade or install of that must have new proggy "oh damn! what the hell did I mess up now" LINUX IS NOT JUST FOR THE POWER USER! LINUX IS HERE FOR THOSE WHO HAVE THE POWER TO CHOOSE. Cheers :) -- Ted Ozolins (VE7TVO) Westbank, B. C. According to Ottawa "ALL CANADIANS ARE LIARS AND THIEVES" Powered by Slackware 8.1, sent with Mozilla -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] running X at nice -10
Quoting gabor from Feb 6 > and now back to the topic: > IS GIVING A HIGHER PRIORITY TO X A GOOD IDEA OR NOT ? AFAIK RedHat 8.0 does it per default, together with their "jiffies" kernel hack makes the system much more responsive. My guess is they needed to do that in order to run their GnoDE Desktop at reasonable speed. After all, their minimum reqiurements are a PII@200, 128MB RAM. I have had very good expierience with doing it on my "slow" (Celeron 700) old machine when using GNOME2, as nautilus got faster since GNOME-1.4, but still not fast enough for serious work. (I don't need to do it anymore because I now have a dual-CPU machine so X always has a CPU to use no matter the load.) I would say if your machine is not up to par with the Desktop you are using you will benefit from that. On a fast machine, you won't notice the difference. greets, Peter G. (And if you are really into it, you might also try dumping your PS/2 mouse and using an USB one. PS/2 eats a _lot_ of interrupts you know...) -- "The Empire never ended." Tractates: Cryptica Scriptura, no. 6 -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] running X at nice -10
On Thu, 2003-02-06 at 14:42, Ernie Schroder wrote: > Thanks to all of the list for their help in getting my 2 Gentoo boxes up and > running. I have some googling to do now. I've come to the realization that I > don't have a good grasp on /proc. If I have questions once I've done some > research, I'll be back with them, and I'll be damned if I'll be embarrassed. you're absolutely right :)... and now back to the topic: IS GIVING A HIGHER PRIORITY TO X A GOOD IDEA OR NOT ? :))) gabor -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] running X at nice -10
http://www.redhat.com/docs/manuals/linux/RHL-7.3-Manual/ref-guide/s1-proc-topfiles.html If there's anyone else out there that knows squat about /proc, try the above link. P.S. I agree, Felix -- Regards, Ernie 100% Microsoft and Intel free On Thursday 06 February 2003 08:52, Felix Rodriguez wrote: > The only stupid question is the one you don't ask. > > At 08:42 AM 2/6/2003 -0500, Ernie Schroder wrote: > >On Thursday 06 February 2003 04:08, Jozsa Kristof wrote: > > > As a sidenote, I'm getting fed up with the level of discussions going > > > up here. I always thought the gentoo distribution is meant for the > > > power user, not for the plain brave user -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] running X at nice -10
On Thu, 2003-02-06 at 10:08, Jozsa Kristof wrote: > As a sidenote, I'm getting fed up with the level of discussions going up > here. I always thought the gentoo distribution is meant for the power user, > not for the plain brave user (the difference is that the power user has both > the experience and the _knowledge_ to do what he/she wants). You could suggest to the mailing list administrators to add another list, something like gentoo-gods, but according to yourself I think you will realize very soon that > OK, I really feel like talking to myself, but still.. PS: I am one of those brainfarters who received from the list a lot more than they gave. -- Arturo di Gioia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: Re: [gentoo-user] running X at nice -10
At 2003-02-06, 08:52:00 you wrote: The only stupid question is the one you don't ask. At 08:42 AM 2/6/2003 -0500, Ernie Schroder wrote: >> On Thursday 06 February 2003 04:08, Jozsa Kristof wrote: >> > As a sidenote, I'm getting fed up with the level of discussions going up >> > here. I always thought the gentoo distribution is meant for the power user, >> > not for the plain brave user - [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list After several replies this guy realizes how stupid he sounds? The sad reality: not likely.
Re: [gentoo-user] running X at nice -10
The only stupid question is the one you don't ask. At 08:42 AM 2/6/2003 -0500, Ernie Schroder wrote: On Thursday 06 February 2003 04:08, Jozsa Kristof wrote: > As a sidenote, I'm getting fed up with the level of discussions going up > here. I always thought the gentoo distribution is meant for the power user, > not for the plain brave user -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] running X at nice -10
On Thursday 06 February 2003 04:08, Jozsa Kristof wrote: > As a sidenote, I'm getting fed up with the level of discussions going up > here. I always thought the gentoo distribution is meant for the power user, > not for the plain brave user Maybe the reason that Gentoo is gaining so quickly in popularity is that is IS geared toward the "power user" and so many of us who have migrated from dependancy hell want to learn. I've been running Linux on at least one machine since SUSE 6.0 and have learned infinately more about it in the month I've been using Gentoo than in the 3+ years with SUSE, Mandrake,RedHat & Elx. No, I'm not a "power user", far from it but, though I don't think that that is my ultimate goal, I want to learn as much as I can. Snotty, superior elitists like yourself are an annoyance and turn off a lot of people who otherwise might become Linux users. Comments such as the above are not only inconsiderate, but they harm the reputation of the whole community. I, for one, am going to continue to ask, sometimes stupid questions in my quest to learn and not be embarrassed by self absorbed individuals. Thanks to all of the list for their help in getting my 2 Gentoo boxes up and running. I have some googling to do now. I've come to the realization that I don't have a good grasp on /proc. If I have questions once I've done some research, I'll be back with them, and I'll be damned if I'll be embarrassed. -- Regards, Ernie 100% Microsoft and Intel free -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] running X at nice -10
On Thu, 2003-02-06 at 10:08, Jozsa Kristof wrote: > As a sidenote, I'm getting fed up with the level of discussions going up > here. I always thought the gentoo distribution is meant for the power user, > not for the plain brave user (the difference is that the power user has both > the experience and the _knowledge_ to do what he/she wants). Appearently at > least the gentoo-user list is filled with people mostly coming from the 'huh > what's /proc, nevermind, let's emerge -ep world again with -O9' part. That's > getting a bit boring.. I refuse to believe that this rant came from the same person who happily upgraded glibc from 2.2 to 2.3 on a machine he needed for business purposes without first testing it on a separate machine to see if it actually worked. Oh yeah, you're a real power user -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] running X at nice -10
On Thu, 6 Feb 2003 10:08:01 +0100 Jozsa Kristof <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > As a sidenote, I'm getting fed up with the level of discussions going > up here. I always thought the gentoo distribution is meant for the > power user, not for the plain brave user (the difference is that the > power user has both the experience and the _knowledge_ to do what > he/she wants). Catch up with reality. I'm happy that your experience and _knowledge_ has brought you to such delerious heights that you can sneer at the rest of ignorant humanity, but the only way to learn is to ask questions and seek knowledge. The user who doesn't know what /proc is will learn that and more and will soon be able to help others. -- Collins Richey - Denver Area Athlon-XP gentoo 1.4_rc2++ system xfce4-cvs -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] running X at nice -10
On Thu, Feb 06, 2003 at 10:11:47AM +0200, Voicu Liviu wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > On Thursday 06 February 2003 06:43, gabor wrote: > > hi, > > > > i've read in the xine-faq, that running X at a higher-priority ( lower > > nice level ) is a good idea... > > > > i understant that that would improve the responsiveness of X, but i > > wanted to know about others experiences... > > using "nice -n -10" will make yout CPU busy most of time with the Xthis is > what u want? That's stupid. Renicing X to level -10 will cause the scheduling give more priority to X, so when X actually has to do something, it'll be scheduled before other processes running at lower priorities. As a sidenote, I'm getting fed up with the level of discussions going up here. I always thought the gentoo distribution is meant for the power user, not for the plain brave user (the difference is that the power user has both the experience and the _knowledge_ to do what he/she wants). Appearently at least the gentoo-user list is filled with people mostly coming from the 'huh what's /proc, nevermind, let's emerge -ep world again with -O9' part. That's getting a bit boring.. Anyway, have fun with gentoo.. I'll do the same, but off-list. Good luck, Christopher ps. if the above doesn't fit you, dont take it.. it wasn't meant for direct offense to anyone on the list. -- .Digital.Yearning.for.Networked.Assassination.and.Xenocide -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] running X at nice -10
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Thursday 06 February 2003 06:43, gabor wrote: > hi, > > i've read in the xine-faq, that running X at a higher-priority ( lower > nice level ) is a good idea... > > i understant that that would improve the responsiveness of X, but i > wanted to know about others experiences... using "nice -n -10" will make yout CPU busy most of time with the Xthis is what u want? > > do other people do that? does it work well for them? > > gabor > > > -- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE+QhjDMcVU5N/V6I8RAv3cAJ9ccB0cB2x8sHgn3BLv2VnkC5+U8ACfRHRo LEGJtNx4Qk3B/82RJgOfmbM= =2TBN -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
[gentoo-user] running X at nice -10
hi, i've read in the xine-faq, that running X at a higher-priority ( lower nice level ) is a good idea... i understant that that would improve the responsiveness of X, but i wanted to know about others experiences... do other people do that? does it work well for them? gabor -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
