Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!apollo!oj From: oj@apollo.HP.COM (Ellis Oliver Jones) Newsgroups: comp.sys.apollo Subject: Re: using X on sr10.2 Message-ID: <47256e8e.20b6d@apollo.HP.COM> Date: 30 Nov 89 13:54:00 GMT References: <46ee595d.20b6d@apollo.HP.COM> Sender: root@apollo.HP.COM Reply-To: oj@apollo.hp.com (Ollie Jones) Organization: Apollo Computer, Chelmsford, MA Lines: 45 In article Alan Bair wrote: >In just glancing through the 2 parts I saw >answers to at least 3 problems I have run into. Would you consider posting your questions (and answers, if you have them)? I figure everybody's going through the same learning curve with Domain/X, so we may as well share information. >I was encouraged to hear that the X merge into SR10.2 is ready. Me too. It seemed like it was taking forever to get done. Vacation time.... >It looked like this release is based on X11R3, let me know if that is wrong. That's correct. Actually, the client code (including libraries) is almost completely vanilla XV11R3. The server is "based on" the MIT XV11R2 server but has had many XV11R3 bugfixes and features added. Xlib is set up as a shareable library, and /usr/lib/libX11.a (which actually lives at /usr/X11/lib/isp_m68k/libX11.a , and is found via an intricate little nest of links which allows our two isps--m68k and Prism--to coexist) is a stub. This makes application executables a bunch smaller. The real Xlib bits are at /lib/x11lib . >There was also mention on Motif, will that be provided too? OSF/Motif isn't bundled with XV11R3. It is due to ship soon as a layered product. It has been released from R&D and is in the process of software manufacturing. >If not, are there any problems building it on the SR10.1 or 10.2 X? OSF/Motif was easy to build (on SR10.2, I didn't try it on SR10.1). We used the 1989.1 compilers, and we incorporated some late bug fixes from our new colleagues at HP Corvallis into our binaries. >You may not want to answer this, but I have to ask. I don't mind answering questions about competitive products, as long as you don't mind remembering that I don't know much about them, and definitely can't make any commitments about them. >Are there any reasons to keep Sun's XView from porting to the Apollo There shouldn't be. If there are problems with our product which prevent any compliant X client code from running, we'd very much like to hear about them. >...maybe it has already been done. I don't know. Does anybody out there in netland? /Ollie Jones (speaking for myself not necessarily for HP Apollo Systems Division)