MM> Sure, got that. But on the other hand I don't exactly know what
MM> could eat up ressources in the font serving. Meaning what
MM> performance gains can be expected by using a font server. I can
MM> only understand that using a font server is useful for
MM> adminitration purposes, so you can centrally administer all
MM> fonts. But else ?
The font rasterisers take up about 250 KB on x86, more on RISC. That
might be significant if you consider that you can build an X server in
less than 700 KB (on Intel).
In addition, rasterising fonts takes some time. If your desktop
machine is very slow, you're better off running a font server on a
faster machine.
As far as my opinion goes, only users of tiny handheld machines should
be concerned with running a font server. However, I do know some
people who prefer using a font server at all times.
Juliusz
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
