Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!sdd.hp.com!hp-pcd!hpcvlx!jbb From: jbb@hpcvlx.cv.hp.com (Jim B. Byers) Newsgroups: comp.sys.hp Subject: Re: Questions about HPUX 8.0, X11R4, HP policy Message-ID: <101950171@hpcvlx.cv.hp.com> Date: 14 Dec 90 22:22:49 GMT References: <1990Dec13.100152@dali.gatech.edu> Organization: Hewlett-Packard Co., Corvallis, OR, USA Lines: 95 >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.' Yes the 7.03 server is being moved and improved into 8.0. >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? The MIT tape is widely available. People on the net have responded with ftp sites when software has been requested on the net. > 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! The 7.03 server is R4. There is also a post 7.03 server that is ftp-able and runs fast on a 98550 card that is available via anonymous ftp. See my posting in the responses to "Re: Dream system" (in comp.sys.hp) describing where to get it. This server was announced in comp.sys.hp quite a while back. > 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? That has been our experience. As a general practice it is always better to have libraries that were compliled for the OS you are linking on. I would very much using the post 7.03 server on 7.0 or 7.03 and not use the 6.5 server. I don't know of anyone using the 6.5 server on a latter release or know why they would. > 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? The MIT tape contains a huge mix of MIT blessed/authored "core" programs, and a large bunch of contributed programs that are in various states of quality and reliability. Which ones are of interest to you? If they all are, have you considered installing the MIT tape itself? Which one would you expect us to answer questions on if they were provided? Which ones would you expect us to bugfix if you were on support services and found a problem? > 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. This is a general argument about support contracts and whether all future versions should be free. I will not add to much here since this gets covered elsewhere for Unix, Dos and application software. My 2 cents is that I see considerable effort going into new functionality. I expect that I will pay to upgrade to new versions of any software I use be it Unix, Dos or whatever. Nothing is free. If all future releases were free then it would cost more upfront. This would be unfair to those who buy a product and rarely upgrade. > X is in the public domain. HP makes so called `inhancements' >(read "incompatible frilly fluff") to it and sells it for money. >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.... Well, yes there is a public version of X. It is a reference port. In order to do this properly, most peices are the least common denominator. For example, the server assumes a dumb frame buffer. If you want to use that great, it is available. We worked quite hard to assure that the MIT stuff will compile up correctly on our machines. We also went to great effort to provide screen drivers so that one could compile the MIT server and still get good performance. If you think that the MIT stuff is bug free when it is released then you have not followed the long list of patches :-). In working with MIT in this way we try to aid the users out there who need the latest and greatest leading edge (bleading edge?) stuff while at the same time realizing that what many customers ask for is stable solid code (in supported releases.) Where have you found or X11 to be incompatible? Compatibility with the standard release is religion here. We certainly add things that people have said they needed (devices other than a mouse and keyboard), the sox11 driver, Access to the 3D accelerators - but were have we lost compatibility? Jim Byers Interface Technology Operation Marketing/Lab team "The X11/Motif/Vue/Architect folks in Corvallis"