Nicholas Wourms wrote: > --- Jehan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>Nicholas Wourms wrote: >> >>>--- Jehan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>>If you search the archives, others have already made icons ready for >> >>you >> >>>use :). >> >>Well, I had this one for quite a while already. >> >> >>>I wonder why not just can all the dos stuff by having the >>>batch file call bash which then calls startxwin.sh? One file is >> >>*much* >> >>>easier to maintain then two. Anywho, let me know your thoughts on >> >>this.. >> >>That would be nice I agree. But for what I see on this mailing list, >>lots of people have problems with startxwin.sh (.xinitrc and .Xautorithy >> >>stuff) while very few people complain about startxwin.bat. So until we >>can have startxwin.sh to work as is for most people, I think it's better >> >>to stick with the batch file for now. >> > > > You are mistaking "startx" for "startxwin.sh". startxwin.sh is basically > the same thing as startxwin.bat, but without all the nasty path > conversions and soforth. Look again, it has nothing to do with .xinitrc > and .Xauthority.
One would think so but no. I have an old .Xauthority from a linux account. If I use this one and run X with startxwin.sh, I get a bunch of Xlib: connection to ":0.0" refused by server Xlib: No protocol specified xsetroot: unable to open display ':0.0' for each application I try to run. If I use an empty .Xauthority, then everything works fine. Well, not everything actually but at least I have xterm starting. I don't know what differs between the shell and the batch version of startxwin, but there is definitely something. Jehan