Rootless Mode is an Important and Needed Feature
I think that a Rootless mode for the Xserver right now is one of the most important and crucial features needed. For the Xserver to be used in a way that is convenient for many users, the option to have X applications displayed on the main Windows desktop is pretty important. Of course the current Root mode should also be available as well, since it also has uses. The new rootless mode should be one of the top priorities. __ Do you Yahoo!? New DSL Internet Access from SBC Yahoo! http://sbc.yahoo.com
Debatable: Rootless Mode is an Important and Needed Feature
While, it might be nice to allow Windows to be the Window Manager and that it might be convenient, it is not a requirement for many people's regular and daily use of the Xserver. Would it be cool? Yes. I cannot right now think of a single X app would work better if Windows managed it. If there are, OK. I can't think of any
CATIA Launch Fails
I have installed CYGWIN and XFREE on my windows 2000 PC. Then I connect to an AIX machine and run a CAD application CATIA . I get the following error Xlib: XInputExtension is missing on myPC_IP:0.0 I am guessing that I am either missing extension XInputExtension or it is disabled Can anyone help? Thanks Vishal Nangrani
Re: Debatable: Rootless Mode is an Important and Needed Feature
I think that you are looking at it a different way.. If we had a rootless X-windows it would allow better integration with our current environment... and would help get it past the pointy haired bosses Thanks David R. Fischer Jim Drash wrote: While, it might be nice to allow Windows to be the Window Manager and that it might be convenient, it is not a requirement for many people's regular and daily use of the Xserver. Would it be cool? Yes. I cannot right now think of a single X app would work better if Windows managed it. If there are, OK. I can't think of any begin:vcard n:Fischer;David tel;cell:623-217-5858 x-mozilla-html:FALSE org:AMIS;Product Support adr:;;8701 E. Hartford Drive;Scottsdale;AZ;85255;USA version:2.1 email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] title:Systems Support Eng. fn:David Fischer end:vcard
Re: Debatable: Rootless Mode is an Important and Needed Feature
Well, it isnt an absolute requirement, but it certianly is a significant convienience. I mantian some computer systems for some people, if I wished to use the Xserver to provide an X application for people to use, I know that if I told many people that they first had to maxamise a certian window and then find the application in that window, many users would be perplexed and complain loudly. For me a root mode is very useful, I like using my X Window Manager and X Desktop in a seperate window. Some users I maintian for though would be perplexed by this if I decided to provide X programs for them to use. This feature would be important to me for that convenience aspect, I know apps probably wouldnt work better in a rootless mode. While, it might be nice to allow Windows to be the Window Manager and that it might be convenient, it is not a requirement for many people's regular and daily use of the Xserver. Would it be cool? Yes. I cannot right now think of a single X app would work better if Windows managed it. If there are, OK. I can't think of any __ Do you Yahoo!? New DSL Internet Access from SBC Yahoo! http://sbc.yahoo.com
RE: Debatable: Rootless Mode is an Important and Needed Feature
I'm sure Harold would appreciate any patch contributions you make towards this... Seriously, very week (or so) somebody asks for this, but nobody puts code forwards. *shrug*, I think Harold is doing a fantastic job, and when he eventually gets around to scratching that itch I'll thank him again. However, I am not in a position to aid the xfree development; so I don't feel I can insist on something that would take so much effort... J.
Re: Debatable: Rootless Mode is an Important and Needed Feature
True. I also am unable to provide code . John Morrison wrote: I'm sure Harold would appreciate any patch contributions you make towards this... Seriously, very week (or so) somebody asks for this, but nobody puts code forwards. *shrug*, I think Harold is doing a fantastic job, and when he eventually gets around to scratching that itch I'll thank him again. However, I am not in a position to aid the xfree development; so I don't feel I can insist on something that would take so much effort... J. begin:vcard n:Fischer;David tel;cell:623-217-5858 x-mozilla-html:FALSE org:AMIS;Product Support adr:;;8701 E. Hartford Drive;Scottsdale;AZ;85255;USA version:2.1 email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] title:Systems Support Eng. fn:David Fischer end:vcard
Re: XFree 4.2.1 + fontconfig-2
Alexander Gottwald wrote: #if Concat(SharedLib,libname) #define LibraryTargetName(libname) Concat3(lib,libname,.dll.a) #else #define LibraryTargetName(libname) Concat3(lib,libname,l.a) #endif But I don't know if this is either valid for imake or if it will break anything. And when you do a shared and a static version, the static version will most likely be name libName.dll.a too. I just checked and the above violates the cpp syntax. You can not have a macro with a conditional which depends on a parameter. |#define MACRO(x) |#if x |#define RESULT YES |#else |#define RESULT NO |#endif does not work. The preprocessor can not decide which one will be used later. Those preprocessor macros are not functions. What does this mean for us? Imagine you have libX11 as shared library and eg. libXt as static library (current configuration). a dependency like this | program: LibraryTargetName(X11) LibraryTargetName(Xt) which we want to resolve to | program: libX11.dll.a libXt.a is not possible. We'd have to build something like this | #if SharedLibraryX11 | #define X11lib SharedLibraryTargetName(X11) | #else | #define X11lib LibraryTargetName(X11) | #endif | ... | program: $(X11lib) $(Xtlib) and this must be done for all the code. My conclusion: We should stay with libName.a even for import libraries. Changing it and don't being able to build a simple macro which wraps it properly will sooner ar later cause compile problems. comments? bye ago -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.gotti.org ICQ: 126018723
Re: Rootless Mode is an Important and Needed Feature
Mlarcvaernas wrote: I think that a Rootless mode for the Xserver right now is one of the most important and crucial features needed. For the Xserver to be used in a way that is convenient for many users, the option to have X applications displayed on the main Windows desktop is pretty important. Of course the current Root mode should also be available as well, since it also has uses. The new rootless mode should be one of the top priorities. The rootless modes already has a high priority. But it is also a very complex problem and unless someone with _very_ much sparetime and good programming skills starts working on it, it will take a long time to finish it. bye ago -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.gotti.org ICQ: 126018723
Re: Rootless Mode is an Important and Needed Feature
Really? Thanks for the insight. Are you willing to sacrifice 20 hours per week to work on it? No? In case you didn't notice, rootless mode has been on the To-Do list for over a year. It is simply difficult and large in scope, thus no one is working on it. In fact, there isn't really any work going on in Cygwin/XFree86 on a daily basis, so rootless mode isn't going to get done anytime soon unless you are volunteering. Also, a question for you: What do I gain from sacrificing my time to implement a rootless mode? A rising stock price? A raise in my salary? Worldwide fame? A recommendation for a job? Nope --- I get none of that, I only loose my free time, so any time I spend on Cygwin/XFree86 had damn well better be worth it to me, because I'm the only one that can give me something for me efforts (which is simply giving myself satisfaction that I accomplished something, which I already have plenty of). Feeling fiesty? Why don't you suggest that we translate X graphics calls to GDI graphics calls next --- then I can once again point you to the To-Do list and to some work in progress. Sheesh. Harold Mlarcvaernas wrote: I think that a Rootless mode for the Xserver right now is one of the most important and crucial features needed. For the Xserver to be used in a way that is convenient for many users, the option to have X applications displayed on the main Windows desktop is pretty important. Of course the current Root mode should also be available as well, since it also has uses. The new rootless mode should be one of the top priorities. __ Do you Yahoo!? New DSL Internet Access from SBC Yahoo! http://sbc.yahoo.com
Re: Debatable: Rootless Mode is an Important and Needed Feature
Thank you John. You've got precisely the viewpoint that I am trying to instill in Mr. Mlarcvaernas. I guess the idea is don't look a gift horse in the mouth, eh? :) Harold John Morrison wrote: I'm sure Harold would appreciate any patch contributions you make towards this... Seriously, very week (or so) somebody asks for this, but nobody puts code forwards. *shrug*, I think Harold is doing a fantastic job, and when he eventually gets around to scratching that itch I'll thank him again. However, I am not in a position to aid the xfree development; so I don't feel I can insist on something that would take so much effort... J.
Re: Rootless Mode is an Important and Needed Feature
Good point Alexander. On a side note: Why is it that XDarwin has so many people contributing code and features (they seem to have an OpenGL-passthrough system now, which is pretty amazing), while Cygwin/XFree86 has so few contributors? This seems contradictory because Windows is on 95% of desktops while Mac OS X is only on 1% (~20% of Apple's 5% market share are running Mac OS X). That question will probably always baffle me. Harold Alexander Gottwald wrote: Mlarcvaernas wrote: I think that a Rootless mode for the Xserver right now is one of the most important and crucial features needed. For the Xserver to be used in a way that is convenient for many users, the option to have X applications displayed on the main Windows desktop is pretty important. Of course the current Root mode should also be available as well, since it also has uses. The new rootless mode should be one of the top priorities. The rootless modes already has a high priority. But it is also a very complex problem and unless someone with _very_ much sparetime and good programming skills starts working on it, it will take a long time to finish it. bye ago
Re: Rootless Mode is an Important and Needed Feature
--- Mlarcvaernas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think that a Rootless mode for the Xserver right now is one of the most important and crucial features needed. For the Xserver to be used in a way that is convenient for many users, the option to have X applications displayed on the main Windows desktop is pretty important. Of course the current Root mode should also be available as well, since it also has uses. The new rootless mode should be one of the top priorities. Since you are using it in a commericial environment, I suggest you cough up so dough to sponser Harold for a weeks worth of work. Then you'd get your rootless mode. Otherwise, tell the whining users to shut their piehole. Cheers, Nicholas __ Do you Yahoo!? New DSL Internet Access from SBC Yahoo! http://sbc.yahoo.com
Re: Screen size question
On Fri, 27 Sep 2002 1:39 am, Christopher Faylor wrote: Redirecting to the correct mailing list. On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 11:26:20PM +0800, Stephen Liu wrote: Hi All People Can I issue following command to regulate the screen size at starting cygwin. # Xwin -query 192.168.0.XXX -screen aa x bb aa = width of screen in inches bb = height of screen in inches so that Linux would not cover Window screen completely. If NO, kindly advise how to make it. Thanks in advance. Use pixels, not inches. If you windows desktop is 1024x768, you could try for example $ XWin -query 192.168.0.XXX -screen 0 800 640 NOTE: Do NOT use 'inches', and do not use 'x' between width and height. See 'man XWin' for more info, or the users guide - http://xfree86.cygwin.com/docs/ug/configure-cygwin-xfree-options.html Rasjid.
