Re: [gentoo-user] I want my xmms

[Dan]

On Wed, 03 Jan 2007 22:43:48 +0100
Robert Cernansky <hslists2@××××××.sk> wrote:

> On Wed, 3 Jan 2007 16:05:18 +0200 Alan McKinnon
> <alan@××××××××××××××××.za> wrote:
>
> > Throughout this thread many people have commented on audacious
> > being a resource hog of monumental proportions. Every single one of
> > them is wrong and this myth really needs to be debunked. Here's why:
>
> I agree. I'm still using xmms so I can compare. Here are few lines
> from top (displaying a Mem window - 'Shift+g 3'). Both players were
> playing same mp3 file.
>
>   PID %MEM  VIRT SWAP  RES CODE DATA  SHR nFLT nDRT S  PR %CPU COMMAND
>  8810 10.9  172m  62m 109m 1620 108m 9104  779    0 S  15  0.0 X
> 11170  9.7  308m 210m  97m   80 129m  19m  897    0 S  15  0.0
> firefox-bin 7750  2.0  164m 143m  20m  480  41m  11m  117    0 R  15
> 0.0 audacious 7810  1.8 49940  30m  17m 1524   9m 5016   72    0 S
> 15  0.0 emacs 7739  1.1  149m 138m  11m  984  59m 7816   49    0 R
> 15  0.0 xmms
>
> Although audacious eats twice more resident memory than xmms, I think
> it's not that bad to call it 'resource hog'. You can see real resource
> hogs on the first two lines. :-)
>
> Btw, how do you guys get so little virtual memory? :-O
>
> Robert
>
>
thanks, nice to have some terminal ouput sent along to substantiate
this discussion!  i like the 'mem window' a lot.  top is cool...
-- 
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list