Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uunet!decwrl!ucbvax!bloom-beacon!govt.shearson.COM!fgreco
From: fgreco@govt.shearson.COM (Frank Greco)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x
Subject: Re:  Joining Open Windows 2.0 and MIT X.
Message-ID: <9008161357.AA19858@islanders.>
Date: 16 Aug 90 13:57:12 GMT
Sender: daemon@athena.mit.edu (Mr Background)
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 61

>
>1.  Is it reasonable to copy (or link) the libraries in /usr/lib to the
>    lib directory in OPENWINHOME?  Presumably the versions I have with
>    the latest MIT patches are newer and better than the ones that came
>    with OW 2.0.  And presumably as new fixes come out of MIT they will
>    continue to improve.  I've tried these links (in a personal copy of
>    OW 2.0 on my workstation) and this seems to work .  In fact, it prevents
>    many of our existing X applications from complaining about library
>    versions (I can keep LD_LIBRARY_PATH defined without any conflicts).
>    Are there any hidden gotchas?
>    
	We do the same thing.  Everything, so far, works fine.

>2.  Assuming that there is no desire to run sunview or news applications
>    would it be reasonable/better/faster to run the X server in /usr/bin/X11
>    instead of xnews?  The xnews program is more than twice the size of the
>    Xsun executable and presumably does a lot of work to allow for NeWS and
>    sunview.  Again, I have made this change personally and it seems to 
>    work fine.  I have not been able to make any real performance evaluations
>    though.  Note that I'm not talking in this case about replacing xnews
>    (since some of our users presumably want sunview and or NeWS apps).
>    Rather, I have made a link to /usr/bin/X11/Xsun and run that with the
>    -server flag.

	You could bring up xnews with the env variable X11ONLY set.  That
	will, essentially, bring xnews up as a garden variety X server
	and not load any NeWS-ish things into the server.  OW 2.0 server
	is very fast.  Basically the speed we all saw going from vanilla
	X11R3 to R4  is more than obtained from OW 1.X to 2.0 (...or
	perhaps OW 1.X was sooooo slow....;-)  On our network, we mix
	X11R4 and OpenWindows with very minor problems.
	
	We use primarily X software...but the NeWS stuff is so cool.

>    
>4.  Are there any other suggestions for improving the integration of MIT X
>    and OW 2.0?
>    
	There are some weird-ities running OW binaries on a R4 server.  Like
	OW's (2.0 that is) shelltool barfs quite frequently (we don't really
	care since we prefer xterm), some other binaries (mostly game-ish
	things) lock the server (or olwm)... but all in all, every thing
	meshes pretty well for us.

Frank G.



+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
|Frank D. Greco - Consultant        |                                   |
|                                   |                                   |
|On Assignment at:                  |Office:                            |
| Shearson Lehman Brothers          | Crossroads Technologies, Inc.     |
| World Financial Center, 11th Floor| PO Box 530                        |
| New York City, NY 10007           | Fanwood, NJ 07023                 |
|                                   |                                   |
| email: fgreco@shearson.com        | email: frank5@mars.njit.edu       |
| voice: (212) 528-6122             | voice: (201)-754-7820             |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+

My comments reflect my own opinions, not my clients.