5 ms·

Well it was based on TWM.

• snvzz 6y ago
  Yes, but my point was that netbsd had the chance to switch to something Xcb based. And instead, they switched to yet another Xlib-based wm.
  • eschaton 6y ago
    What does it matter? And would an Xcb-based window manager perform well on a 68020 with only a few megabytes of RAM and a 1-bit display?
    • snvzz 6y ago
      Xcb is lighter. It requires less message bouncing back and forth. It is also simpler, and should yield less bugs. Xlib is terrible and should be avoided whether possible[0]. Everything else being equal, Xcb should be faster. This is true on current hardware, or on an Amiga 1200 with a 68030 accelboard like the one I have right next to me. The difference is actually dramatic[1]. [0]: https://www.remlab.net/op/xlib.shtml https://www.remlab.net/op/xlib.shtml [1]: https://www.x.org/wiki/guide/xlib-and-xcb/ https://www.x.org/wiki/guide/xlib-and-xcb/