Re: FAMOpen failed, FAMErrno=0
On Fri, Aug 23, 2002 at 12:02:17AM +0100, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> On Thu, 2002-08-22 at 23:54, Eloy A. Paris wrote:
> > > It's a compile-time option for GnomeVFS, but given that ours is compiled
> > > with FAM support, it seems silly to not have it used by default. I'd
> > > at least vote for a Recommends (in the libgnomevfs2-0 package), and
> > > given that the fam package is only about 200k, I can't imagine anyone
> > > reasonably complaining about a Depends.
> >
> > Well, I don't complain about the Depends itself, but I find the
> > run-time footprint a bit annoying: fam depends on portmap, so we need
> > to have two running processes (fam and portmap). It's starting to look
> > like bloat...
> >
> > What are the advantages of FAM, does it make Gnome faster?
>
> apt-cache show fam, and http://oss.sgi.com/projects/fam/ should answer
> your questions. It doesn't make it faster, it makes it accurate.
>
> Well, it kinda makes it faster too because it wouldn't poll hard on the
> files when monitoring them...
>
> Having portmap running is a bit useless indeed, especially on desktop
> systems where fam would be just about the only daemon making use of it.
Will portmap be run even if you don't have any kind of remote filesystem
mounted ? It should be able to know about this and not launch portmap if
it is not needed, but you still would need to install portmap though.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
Reply to: