> Ralf -- > What happens when you run your cygipc-based build of X11, but do not > have the ipc-daemon running? You can't run KDE, of course, but does the > Xserver itself still work properly? Can non-KDE X apps work? > Xfre has build in support for disabling XIT-SHM support in cases the kernel does not support it. See http://www.atomised.org/docs/XFree86-4.2.1/shm_8c-source.html
xc/programs/Xserver/xext/shm.c
<snip>
void
ShmExtensionInit()
{
ExtensionEntry *extEntry;
int i;
#if defined(__FreeBSD__) || defined(__NetBSD__) || defined(__OpenBSD__)
if (!CheckForShmSyscall())
{
ErrorF("MIT-SHM extension disabled due to lack of kernel support\n");
return;
}
<snip>
Because the cypipc produces a valid return code ENOSYS in cases the ipc-daemon isn't
available,
see http://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2002-11/msg00136.html, there is only a simple
checker functions needed to check the state of the ipc-daemon and enable/disable shm
functions.
The appended patch implemented this support for the xfree server.
See the result:
cd ~/src/xc/programs/Xserver
$ killall ipc-daemon
$ ./XWin.exe &
$ xdpyinfo | grep MIT-SHM
$ killall XWin
$ ipc-daemon &
$ ./XWin.exe &
$ xdpyinfo | grep MIT-SHM
MIT-SHM
Hope that helps
cheers
Ralf
> --
> Chuck
>
>
> Harold L Hunt II wrote:
>
> > Well, that makes it easy. SHM will not be supported by this new build.
> >
> > Harold
> >
> > Christopher Faylor wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, Sep 04, 2003 at 04:45:34PM -0400, Harold L Hunt II wrote:
> >>
> >>> I am not sure. How "automagically" is the IPC daemon installed? If
> >>> it requires user intervention, then we cannot really have XShm in the
> >>> default install.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> You could make it a setup.hint dependency, of course, but that's only
> >> half the battle. The next step would be to get the cygipc daemon
> >> started. I don't think you want to go through that pain unless there is
> >> a clean fallback for when cygipc isn't working right.
>
>
>
xext_shm.patch
Description: Binary data
