Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 36 of 36

Thread: Xfce 4.12 Desktop Release Ends Up Behind Schedule

  1. #31
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    684

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rexilion View Post
    Ah, that could explain it as well. I'm using alsa down here as well. However, I don't believe that pulseaudio is a memory hog these days...
    its not a memory hog, I was just explaining:

    1. why i believe xubuntu is more use friendly than other xfce desktops i've tried

    2. xubuntu isn't really as resource intensive as people are making it out to be

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Rural Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    1,019

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bwat47 View Post
    No need to bash xubuntu, it is definitely the best out of the box XFCE out there. I especially like that by default they use a fork of xfce4-volumed that actually supports pulseaudio properly, they use ubuntu's volume indicator instead of xfce's mixer panel plugin which plays much nicer with pulseaudio, and uses pavucontrol as the mixer which is way better than xfce's mixer.
    I generally use pnmixer and pavucontrol for my Xfce setups - I do have to agree that the default Xfce audio plugins are fairly terrible.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    457

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bwat47 View Post
    its not a memory hog, I was just explaining:

    1. why i believe xubuntu is more use friendly than other xfce desktops i've tried

    2. xubuntu isn't really as resource intensive as people are making it out to be
    Yes, you can make XFCE relatively more memory hungry by applying a different configuration. However, this usually implies using components not part of the standard XFCE desktop. Things like gconf, pulseaudio, nm-applet etc etc. This has nothing to do with XFCE itself.

    It also depends whether if you are running x86 or amd64. The difference is in the 20MB range.

    Furthermore, to be honest I find XFCE to be pretty solid under Gentoo as well.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Rural Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    1,019

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rexilion View Post
    Yes, you can make XFCE relatively more memory hungry by applying a different configuration. However, this usually implies using components not part of the standard XFCE desktop. Things like gconf, pulseaudio, nm-applet etc etc. This has nothing to do with XFCE itself.
    Well, personally I would never want to go without most of those, but yes, they do increase the memory footprint of my Xfce setup.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rexilion View Post
    Furthermore, to be honest I find XFCE to be pretty solid under Gentoo as well.
    I think the complaint was about default configurations and not about the software itself (which should be pretty solid on whatever you set it up on).

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,024

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uid313 View Post
    Too bad it wasn't ported to GTK3 already.
    It was. I ported all of the core components a few years ago. XFCE devs wanted nothing to do with GTK+3. They're floating around somewhere still I'm sure, but now quite out of date.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    684

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by elanthis View Post
    It was. I ported all of the core components a few years ago. XFCE devs wanted nothing to do with GTK+3. They're floating around somewhere still I'm sure, but now quite out of date.
    I've seen a few posts on the XFCE dev mailing lists suggesting that it may start happening soon. No specific posts about intensions for porting to GTK3, but things like this:

    http://mail.xfce.org/pipermail/xfce4...il/030249.html
    http://mail.xfce.org/pipermail/xfce4...il/030252.html

    Looks like they are porting the panel at least, which for me is one of the most important parts because it would mean I could finally use GTK3 indicators in xubuntu, which would mean the return of the messaging indicator

    I don't think its all the XFCE devs that want nothing to do with it, just some of them. I think overall they realize it needs to be done eventually, progress is just slow because some of them don't want to bother with it.
    Last edited by bwat47; 05-02-2013 at 07:34 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •