Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!uupsi!grebyn!ckp
From: ckp@grebyn.com (Checkpoint Technologies)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.i386
Subject: Re: Are these ISC X11 problems fixed?
Message-ID: <21725@grebyn.com>
Date: 30 Aug 90 15:38:27 GMT
References: <21681@grebyn.com> <1990Aug29.111938.487@virtech.uucp>
Reply-To: ckp@grebyn.UUCP (Checkpoint Technologies)
Organization: Grebyn Timesharing, Vienna, VA, USA
Lines: 29

In article <1990Aug29.111938.487@virtech.uucp> cpcahil@virtech.UUCP (Conor P. Cahill) writes:
>In article <21681@grebyn.com> ckp@grebyn.UUCP (Checkpoint Technologies) writes:
>>  o My Caps lock and Num lock appear to have no effect.  My meager
>>research (using xev) seems to indicate they're mapped to the right
>>keysyms.  
>
>Fixed in 1.1.  Don't know about the rest of your problems.

	That's good to hear.

>Anyway, the big plus for X11r4 is the optimized server which is
>something ISC has already done with X11r3, so there won't be a big advantage
>with going to X11r4.

	Are you kidding me? Or is the 1.1 and 1.2 server much faster
than the 1.0 servers?  Circle and arc drawing are pretty slow (so I
don't ever do them if I can help it; I never run xeyes because of
this), and if you set your root window to a pixmap of any size other
than 16x16 you get to watch the background repaint for *countable*
*seconds* when you shuffle windows.  This I do not call optimized,
especially when I've written some routines like this for an Motorola
6809 which were faster.

If this is better in 1.1 and 1.2, then ignore this diatribe...
-- 
First comes the logo: C H E C K P O I N T  T E C H N O L O G I E S      / /  
                                                                    \\ / /    
Then, the disclaimer:  All expressed opinions are, indeed, opinions. \  / o
Now for the witty part:    I'm pink, therefore, I'm spam!             \/