Michel Daenzer wrote: > Bob Proulx wrote: > > The current train of thought here is to require that X on linux always > > runs with backing store. Which means starting the X server with +bs > > or adding 'Option "backingstore"' to the XF86Config-4 file. > > You can choose between that or fixing the code.
Did you mean the XFree86 code or our in house code? My understanding is that our own code was not "broken". It gets an expose event and it must redraw. But this can take a while on a complicated image. With backing store enabled it is very fast because it avoids this operation. Which sounds much more efficient. How do other X applications handle this? Does everyone just brute force through it and suffer the redraw time? > Backing store is disabled by default in XFree86 because the current > implementation is inefficient. Does inefficient imply broken functionality? Inefficient how? Does it leak memory? Looking for a way to get a handle on the issue. What is the downside to enabling backing store "+bs" on the server. It sounds like a safe default to me right now. Thanks Bob
pgpL19bfVx8ti.pgp
Description: PGP signature
