On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 09:39:14PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote: > Tzafrir Cohen wrote: > > So now compare the overhead of those applets (CPU, memory, anything > > else?) to the applets you have running. > > This is a flawed analogy. Each one of those applets are ones that serve > some purpose to me at the moment. I use the menu dozens of times a night, the > workspace switcher hundreds, window buttons hundreds, I glance at the clock > all the time, monitor the weather most nights and the icons in the tray > provide me with useful information. An MTA resident in memory being used once > a day, if that, is not serving me an immediate purpose. Considering the > class of machine this is (highly portable, personal machine) it is highly > unlikely that it would ever needs a resident MTA.
I agree with "it would ever needs a resident MTA". > > Is the saving really worth it? What are the actual problems with the > > exim? > > Nothing. I use Exim on the machine hosting my domain. The machine that > processes several thousand messages a day. The machine where having a > resident MTA makes sense. On a machine where I don't look at local mail, > won't be serving mail, having it resident makes no sense. If so, why not configuring exim or postfix as non-resident. It can be done. Why not? If resource is issue, reducing eye candies have real impact. I always wonder why gnome-terminal eats so much CPU resource. Osamu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
