Comment 12 for bug 1566157

On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 12:31 PM, Alkis Georgopoulos <
<email address hidden>> wrote:

> I tried applying the latest 13 commits from the test-3-18 branch on top
> of Xenial's metacity.
>

Are you sure that all patches applied?

If my benchmarks were correct, it made things even slower.
>
> glmark2 score:
> xenial-metacity --no-composite: 311
> test-3-18-metacity --no-composite: 154
> xenial-marco --no-composite: 902
>

glmark2 segfaults for me, but glxgears gives me following results:
no-composite: ~750 FPS vs. ~2380 FPS
composite: ~540 FPS vs. ~710 FPS

I.e. now it's 6 times, rather than 3 times, slower than marco...
>

If that is true then I have no idea how this could happen... At least one
of problem was that all frame/decoration windows was created with 32bit
visual for transparency (even when running without compositing manager). If
we look from no-composite side than it is almost only about revert of that
change...

Can we use marco instead? Doesn't it additionally have CSD support?
>

In Flashback session? No - Flashback will never use marco.

Or, could end users of gnome-flashback-session decide to install and use
> marco instead of metacity without bumping into major issues?

It should be possible to install, but I have no idea if there will be
problems...