11 ms·
That's what Xvfb is for. "xvfb-run firefox" and "firefox -headless" should be functionally equivalent. But I would still be interested in performance compariso
by Wilya 9y ago
That's what Xvfb is for.
"xvfb-run firefox" and "firefox -headless" should be functionally equivalent. But I would still be interested in performance comparison with numbers.
- Vinnl 9y agoDoesn't xvfb still just run an Xserver, simply without painting? Or do headless Chrome and Firefox still require an X server running too?
- Wilya 9y agoYou're right, there is a difference. I meant equivalent from the point of view of the user who wants to run tests, not on the way they work internally.