Robin
Hi @anti-apXos, many thanks for checking and analysing and your highly welcome comments.
at least label it something accurate, like “Fill Memory” since that’s what it does.
This button can be renamed to whatever native English speakers think is best to describe its function (Just head for transifex and modify the en_GB and en_US language for this resource). Btw, in my German translation I have used many different wording, this button reads for example not “Speicher leeren”, but “Speicher aufräumen”, which is what the function actually does (neither emptying nor filling it) : First syncing, then moving all stuff from the compressed caches back to the uncompressed space, and removing the all caches and buffers and recreating them freshly, thus empty, making sure they are no longer fragmented. This is in particularly useful after recovering from extreme memory pressure, when a huge program caused some system stuff to be outsourced to the slow hdd swap in the end of the chain. The the system will only speed up again if you apply precisely this kind of “Speicher aufräumen”.
This is different from what you read in many places in the internet about “clear memory”, where it is recommended to actually fill the memory (e.g. by writing huge amounts of random data to it) in order to clear it. Here nothing is filled at all.
You’re probably running into some of the patches that skidoo added to gksu to block subshell exploits.
I guess so. Thanks for looking into it. Well, I believe for now we can live with the urxvt-sudo-bash-coproc workaround I have invented. I had to apply the same thing for antiX-Hostname-Changer. Similar issue with gksu.
is it really even necessary to loop and update the zram/zswap/memory statistics constantly?
Yes, that’s something I consider to be indispensable. Only then you can learn to understand the impact and of zram and zswap or their combination or their absence when starting e.g. huge memory-consumers. Otherwise you will have to click it open again and again, hundreds of times. That is simply needed for the optimisation of the settings by the user.
functions available as commandline options
Does that really make sense? I mean, you can do all that easily from command line anyway, no need to hide it then behind some command line options of this GUI script. What would be worth thinking about from my point of view is, to create a cli version (like the parallel -cli versions of other antiX scripts), built from the great antiX cli toolset, but this should be done by somebody familiar already with handling this set. I’m only half through in understanding all its refinements.
Windows is like a submarine. Open a window and serious problems will start.