On Sun, 9 Sep 2001 11:31:19 -0400 (EDT), Steve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> X itself can control many functions. Next time you
> have X up, put your cursor over an xterm. Now, hit
> CTRL-left-click, CTRL-right-click, CTRL-middle-click.
> These options are available to any xterm or xterm-based
> app (such as PINE) no matter what window manager (if any)
> you're using. These options are all written into xterm,
> but are made available via X. Feel free to play with
> them, as they apply only to that single xterm. If you
> really mess it up, kill it off and start another. ;-)
I shall try that before I post this, but right now I KNOW I'm
going to have trouble getting X "up" without a wm. :(
> On Sat, 8 Sep 2001, Clarence Verge wrote:
>> The application is last, even tho IT is what you were after in the first
>> place. Whether Netscape looks like Netscape intended or something else
>> is my first question.
>> What sets the appearance of the buttons ? Netscape, the wm or X ?
>> My Netscape included with RH5.? is ver 4.6 (or 4.06) and it looks
>> like hell. How do I make the buttons look like buttons instead of
>> flat squares ? (I don't use icons)
> Here's a screenshot of Netscape 3.04 taken from
> 9wm, which has no title bars or title bar buttons.
> http://wizard.dyndns.org/9wm_ns3.png
> This is the same way it would appear without any
> wm at all, so you can see, it's the wm which controls
> the look of your buttons.
> Now here's a screenshot of the exact same browser,
> but taken from icewm (infidel2 theme, overloaded style)
> http://wizard.dyndns.org/ice_ns3.png
Um. They both look the same to me - and NEITHER resembles NS3.04
on W3.11 in any way. Are you sure those are the correct shots ?
Strangely, your shots showing Arachne look like Arachne.
>> Next, what decides how much screen Netscape will occupy the next
>> time I turn it on ? I can see that most X users like a mess of
>> little windows all over the place but I don't. I want to use the
>> ENTIRE screen for the ONE application on which I am focussing my
>> attention. Every time I start Netscape it seems to only occupy
>> 60% of the available area, and there is no way (except manual
>> stretching) to make it go fullscreen.
> Depends on your configuration. Try <CTRL><ALT><->
> (keypad "minus" not the number-row-minus) and see
> if that doesn't "zoom" things in for you. :-)
> To change the actual size in pixels, you can use
> the geometry option.
Yes, the cntrlALT+/- work for me to change my display mode, but
that wasn't what I was getting at. Seems there should be a button
to make the app go fullscreen but *I* can't find it.
> $ netscape -geometry =400x320+10+20
> will put a 400x320 sized netscape at 10 pixels from
> the left edge and 20 pixels from the top edge.
> Omit the offsets and it'll just go to the default
> location. This is also configurable in a config
> file somewhere, but I don't recall exactly where at
> the moment.
Thanks. I'll look for that.
>> Finally, my biggest question regards X. Does it actually DO anything?
> It's what allows bitmapped graphics to be displayed
> and served. It also provides a means for control when
> lacking a window manager for certain apps
> (CTRL-mouse-click on xterm).
Ah, yes. I forgot the "SERVER" aspect even tho it has been referred
to as a server many times in my error messages. <G>
Foreign content I guess.
>> Finally +1, the method used by Michael which appears to allow the
>> application direct interface to the drivers makes most sense to me.
>> Why isn't it used more often ?
>> This is theoretical only - I haven't got it working yet. :(
> Two reasons.
> First is that 'nix is designed as a multi-user,
> multi-tasking environment. When svgalib directly
> accesses the video hardware, it sets up the
> potential for conflicts. You may recall that
> when I first ran SVGA Arachne, I complained that
> it messed up my X-server.
> The X server allows many users to simultaneously
> access graphical applications, and it handles all
> the interupts and access issues, so there aren't
> any "conflicts" just "sharing."
> (right now steve is running fvwm2 on F9 and crow is
> running icewm on F10, both using the same X server)
> I haven't tried it, but I highly doubt steve could
> run Arachne on F1 with crow running Arachne on F2.
> Maybe someone with more interest in console Arachne
> could prove or disprove that ... ugh. True.
> Will not work!
> Second reason is that direct hardware access is
> available only to root, or those with root permissions.
> A bug in a program could trash a hard drive... or
> a trojan could.
> Graphical console programs in a multi-user OS are
> considered a security risk (because they must be
> setuid, i.e., the program is set to run as if root
> is running it, no matter who runs it).
> Accessing X requires no special permissions, so
> therefore has no more potential for damage than the
> user invoking it.
Thanks a lot for this response.
I don't think in terms of multi-user capabilities so I would have
voted for the simpler single user method.
I doubt I will ever get into multi-tasking with Linux. I don't wish
for it in my day to day activities and whenever I get something like
an animated .gif in my cache stealing cycles to flash itself where
I'm not looking, I find it very annoying and I kill the Netscape cache.
<G>
Now to see what X has for me today. ;-)
- Clarence Verge.
-- Using Arachne 1.66 on DSL.
