| 1 |
> If you *really* want eye candy, try using beryl and emerald from the |
| 2 |
> portage-xgl layman overlay. ;-) |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
Yes, I investigated it. But it seems my card is not so well supported by |
| 5 |
XGL (If you have different experiences let me know) and XGL eye candy |
| 6 |
is (still) not what I was looking for, at least as for what I've seen |
| 7 |
(I'd never use wobbly windows and rotating cubes, sorry). The little, |
| 8 |
subtle effects of composite are enough. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
The only defect I can complain -but I suspect it would require a |
| 11 |
rewriting/rethinking of X apps- is that transparency is applied to a |
| 12 |
whole window. This has the side effect of lowering the contrast of |
| 13 |
what's inside the application. In many contexts (not always) - it would |
| 14 |
be very nice to have a transparent *background* of the current window, |
| 15 |
but opaque (and therefore fully contrasted) foreground. Think of a |
| 16 |
terminal, or a text editor, but not only. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Is there some project aiming to this? |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
> I am pretty sure though that xcompmgr and friends (kcompmgr) are dead. |
| 21 |
> Bugs I've reported against KDE 3.5's compositing issues have been |
| 22 |
> closed with "WONTFIX" and comments that indicate this. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
That's interesting. Can you point me to a link? |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
> The current way things are going is to use compositing window managers |
| 27 |
> such as compiz, beryl, metacity, <whatever xfce4's wm is named>, etc. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
I would not like to be forced to change WM. I'd like to have the same |
| 30 |
effects, no matter what WM I'm running. Composite runs independently of |
| 31 |
the WM - why isn't the same for XGL? |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
m. |
| 34 |
-- |
| 35 |
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list |
Archives