Path: utzoo!censor!geac!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!apple!agate!dog.ee.lbl.gov!me10.lbl.gov!milburn From: milburn@me10.lbl.gov (John Milburn) Newsgroups: comp.sys.hp Subject: Re: Questions about HPUX 8.0, X11R4, HP policy Message-ID: <8599@dog.ee.lbl.gov> Date: 14 Dec 90 20:25:24 GMT References: <1990Dec13.100152@dali.gatech.edu> Sender: usenet@dog.ee.lbl.gov Reply-To: JEMilburn@lbl.gov (John Milburn) Organization: Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, Berkeley, CA Lines: 117 X-Local-Date: Fri, 14 Dec 90 12:25:24 PST In his article mikeg@dali.gatech.edu (Mike Gourlay) angrily writes: >Hi HP people, Well, I'm not an hp person, but here goes. > I hear that HPUX 8.0 will be shipped out in June or July. >I also hear that X11R4 will be send with it. That is, if you have >`software support.' HPUX rev 8.0 will indeed be a major upgrade to the operating system, and as such, HP deserves to recoup the investment they put into it. The mechanism for this is the software support contract, which I believe > What if you don't have software support? [Gripes about >HP policy left for later.] Will someone please make a tar file of the >distribution tape, and put it somewhere? Or send the tar file to those >of us who have no support from HP? I think HP would (rightfully) scream bloody murder if someone were to freely distribute such an archive. (Even _I_ wouldn't consider posting a full OS release. :-) The only reason you don't have support is because you choose not to. > My local HP rep was confused when I told her I knew of >people with X11R4 on an HP. She seems to think that it hasn't been >released yet. People have it, though! X11R4, as released by MIT, compiles and runs rather well under hpux 7.0. I have been using it since last May. Your rep is certainly uninformed, particularly with respect to PD software under hp-ux. This is a common problem, as most hp sales reps have no knowledge of the vast community of networked machines in the world. Try to get one to exchange e-mail with you! > Will the X11R4 binaries running on HPUX 6.5 also run >on a similar machine running 7.0? Specifically, will the X binaries >running on a HPUX 6.5 9000s319C+ run on a HPUX 7.0 9000s370? >Libraries? Server? Client? Most binaries which run under 6.5 will run under 7.0. I don't recall needing to recompile anything when we switched over ( about a year ago.) Of course, I never ran R4 under 6.5, so I can't answer the specific question. I was running MIT's R3 at the time of the switch, and didn't have any problem with it. > Why does the X11R3 that comes with HPUX 7.0 not include >some of the X routines that many public programs expect? Will X11R4 >lack this hideous problem? A number of things are indeed missing. That is what motivated me to get the release from MIT. I don't know HP's rational for releasing only a subset of the binaries and libraries. A larger set of the R3 stuff was made available on an unsupported SE tape, which you can ftp from me10.lbl.gov. If you really want a full X implementation, get the MIT distribution and compile it yourself. It can be had via anonymous ftp from expo.lcs.mit.edu. > Why does HP consider fixing their software bugs (called an update >of the OS) something for which you have to pay big money for a >support contract? It is unfair. If you pay for UNIX, you should get UNIX, >and not have to pay incrementally to have HP give you UNIX over a period >of time. It isn't as if the machine was inexpensive up front. It isn't as if >HPUX is not the most incompatible port of UNIX and X on the planet. It >most certainly is NOT that new versions of the OS are improvements >to UNIX. The new versions are bug fixes. That is not right. I agree with you to a certain extent. If you buy an hp box, with rev 6.x, you should be provided with bug fixes to that revision of the OS free of charge. However, if you choose not to purchase a support contract, you have no inherent right to future major releases. I find the cost of HP support contracts to be very reasonable, particularly the material only level of support. > X is in the public domain. HP makes so called `inhancements' >(read "incompatible frilly fluff") to it and sells it for money. HP bundles a subset of X with their systems, along with some hp enhancements, like mwm and hpterm. They do not sell any MIT software. They have every right to sell their enhancements. If you don't want what hp give you for free, or want more, get it from MIT. >Motif is nice, but the other bugs and left-outs of HP's version of X >on HPUX are not worth it. X should be compilable from the distribution >at MIT, and so capable people should be able to compile X11R4 without >waiting for the newest distribution from HP. Has anyone done that? I'll Many people have done this. >admit that I'm not a capable person when it comes to getting UNIX programs >to run on HPUX. My local rep blaimed it on inherent incompatibilities in >UNIX. WHAT?!?!?!!? That's ridiculous. Inherent incompatibilities in UNIX? Again, your local rep is uninformed. This is, I believe, a major problem with hp. The sales reps are (severe generalization here) remarkably unfamiliar with the systems they sell. [...] > For now, I run many of the X apps I need on a Sparc, and just >have the Sparc use my display. EtherNet is wonderful. xhost + is >fantastic. My HPUX is being used as a dumb X terminal!!! I'd like it >to evolve into something more useful. If there is enough general interest, I could make the R4 binairies and libraries (for s300 and 400 machines) available. > Thank you in advance for your reply, > Mike Gourlay > mike@penguin.gatech.edu -- JEMilburn@lbl.gov ...!ucbvax!lbl.gov!JEMilburn Disclaimer: I speak for myself. -- JEMilburn@lbl.gov ...!ucbvax!lbl.gov!JEMilburn