Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!purdue!decwrl!chico.pa.dec.com!klee
From: klee@chico.pa.dec.com (Ken Lee)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x
Subject: Re: X11R4 server on DS3100; pro/con
Message-ID: <2394@bacchus.dec.com>
Date: 4 Jan 90 21:16:58 GMT
References: <1103@ursa-major.SPDCC.COM>
Sender: news@decwrl.dec.com
Reply-To: klee@decwrl.dec.com
Organization: DEC Western Software Laboratory
Lines: 23

In article <1103@ursa-major.SPDCC.COM>, dyer@spdcc.COM (Steve Dyer) writes:
> If I were going to bring the X11R4 environment over to my color DS3100
running
> UWS 2.1, would there be any need to also bring over the R4 server?

You should also try the UWS2.2 server.  It's faster than the R4 server
at some things and slower at others.  For most applications, you won't
notice much, if any, difference.  The R4 server does include the new
SHAPE extension if you like round windows.  The UWS2.2 server includes
Display PostScript.  Since development continues on both sides, there
isn't an easy answer to your question, except that both the MIT and UWS
servers will continue to improve.

> If I didn't and kept the DEC server, would some R4 apps break?

Only if they require the SHAPE (or other R4-only) extension.  On the
other hand, applications that require Display PostScript will fail on
the R4 server.

Ken Lee
DEC Western Software Laboratory, Palo Alto, Calif.
Internet: klee@decwrl.dec.com
uucp: uunet!decwrl!klee