Xref: utzoo unix-pc.general:2931 comp.sys.att:6525
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!nrl-cmf!ames!zodiac!clash!dglo
From: dglo@clash.ADS.COM (Dave Glowacki)
Newsgroups: unix-pc.general,comp.sys.att
Subject: Re: resash of X-windows and 3b1/7300's
Summary: The Everest of 3B1 hacking.
Message-ID: <7972@zodiac.UUCP>
Date: 22 May 89 21:13:50 GMT
References: <636@flatline.UUCP> <2067@umbc3.UMBC.EDU>
Sender: news@zodiac.UUCP
Reply-To: dglo@ads.com (Dave Glowacki)
Distribution: na
Organization: Advanced Decision Systems, Mt. View, CA (415) 960-7300
Lines: 48

I think the easiest way to get X on the 3b1 is to port the full system.
A 'resash' would probably involve trashing the client-server stuff entirely,
and only porting the Xlib, Xt, and Xaw routines. (1/2 :-)

In article <2067@umbc3.UMBC.EDU> alex@wolf.umbc.edu.UUCP (Alex Crain) writes:
>In article <636@flatline.UUCP> erict@flatline.UUCP (J. Eric Townsend) writes:
>
>>Ok, I remember at one point in the past the statement "X windows won't
>>happen on a 3b1/7300" being made.
>>
>>Why?  I've just read some stuff on X-Windows, and it seems the whole
>>point of X-Windows is that you can make it work on a C64, if you try
>>hard enough. :-).  Seriously, tho, what's stopping a port to the 3b1?
>
>	THere are a couple of deficencies in X windows that make it a dubious
>investment for the 3b1.

But the positive benefits of 1) a REAL window interface and 2) lots of free
software are sure do make it tempting :-)

>	1) The size of the investment. X windows is *huge*, and based entirely
>on network hardware and a good interface to a large screen device. The 3b1 has
>an expensive network interface that most of us do not possess, and minimal
>access to the screen hardware in the form of Fords vidio driver. Most of the
>workstations tha X runs on are either BSD or BSD extended, so the sysV process
>communication stuff has never been written (and we don't have streams anyway).

Not necessarily.  The size of the screen is a drawback, but tony@mcrsys
posted an article last month in comp.windows.x on how he brought up X
on his SysV/386 box with no networking hardware.  Basically, he grabbed
the PD Berkeley headers and played around with the source a bit, but it
didn't look like a HUGE effort.  I can forward the article to anyone who's
interested.

>...
>#2 - we need a good general purpose
>screen driver, that can over ride the existing screen driver for development.
>...
>	I also have some ideas for #2, but I don't have time to write it. What
>I will do is write a very basic screen driver with documented hooks for
>kernal hackers (and would be kernal hackers) to play with, and get it out
>either mid june or before if there is the demand.

I'd be interested in this.  With my miniscule spare time, I've been trying to
figure out how '/etc/lddrv/wind' works.  There's a LOT of stuff that could
be chopped out of there if one were to lose the native interface...
-- 
Dave Glowacki          dglo@ads.com          Advanced Decision Systems