On Thu, 2003-11-13 at 21:08, Jonathan Dowland wrote: > On Thu, Nov 13, 2003 at 06:15:29PM +0800, David Palmer. wrote: > > On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 08:34:19 +0000 > > Jonathan Dowland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > PWM, or ION (pwm, ion, ion-devel packages) > > > > > As I suggested before, Icewm. > > If I reply with, 'As I suggested before, PWM.', when will it stop? :P > > Icewm is lovely and a bit friendlier than pwm, but not the leanest by a > bit. Here's some sizes for reference: > > Package: pwm > Installed-Size: 336 > > Package: icewm > Installed-Size: 1131 > Package: iceme > Installed-Size: 296 > Package: icewm-themes > Installed-Size: 15380 > > Package: ion > Installed-Size: 348 > > Package: wmaker > Installed-Size: 5400 >
Thats some indication but what you should be looking at is the memory usage. Here eye candy can cause a lot more cost that what shows up in the package size. It also depends on the toolkit libraries used. > -- > Jon Dowland > http://jon.dowland.name/ > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
