Date: Mon, 5 Jan 1998 12:32:23 -0500 From: "Alfred Perlstein" <perlsta@sunyit.edu> To: "David E. Wexelblat" <dwex@DataFocus.com>, "'devel@XFree86.Org'" <devel@XFree86.Org> Cc: <hackers@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: interested in working on windows port (sorry for cross post) Message-ID: <199801051338.NAA02521@fang.cs.sunyit.edu>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Who is your target audience? Why on earth would I set up > a windows box that is doing nothing but running X? This > seems extraordinarily useless - if I wanted a dedicated > X machine, I'd run Linux on it. > > The only reason to put X on a Windows PC is interoperability. no, that's not my point, being able to ALT-TAB or ctrl-esc out of it to task switch would be my point, not a lot of people want to install a 300+meg O/S just so they can get X. the reason i came up with the idea is that I'm at a college dorm, SUNYtech in NY, anyhow my roomates are always raving on about how unix is cool and easier to write programs on and blah blah blah... but they are not keen on installing it instead of win95 for several reasons, the disk space, the ton of configuration that has to be, and possible incomadible video cards. therefore if there was a fast free X server out there it would be very useful, ie. double click... MS-word, alt+tab... X... plus imagine how much distribution and press a free and _FAST_ (unlike the microimages server) would get if it would run under '95. -Alfred ---------- > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Alfred Perlstein > > Sent: Monday, January 05, 1998 11:05 AM > > To: devel@XFree86.Org > > Cc: hackers@freebsd.org > > Subject: Re: interested in working on windows port (sorry for > > cross post) > > > > i have no interest in making a "let windows be my window manager X" > > that is > > garbage, i've seen them and they are horrible, my main interest is > > getting > > a full screen port done with XDM logon abilities. using windows as my > > window manager gives me a chill and ruins the whole experiance for me > > :) > > > > if possible a "full screen in one window" would be a later project... > > > > i do not want to "stray" from the Xfree86 model, i would like to have > > this > > port be maintained easily, not as a one time port and forget about it > > deal > > where so much is kludged around that maintaining it is impossible. > > > > to me, DirectX+fullscreen is the way to go. > > > > i've seen "in window" X servers and the performance is horrid, why run > > X > > and make it slow? > > > > -Alfred > > > > ---------- > > > From: David E. Wexelblat <dwex@datafocus.com> > > > To: 'devel@XFree86.Org' > > > Cc: hackers@freebsd.org > > > Subject: RE: interested in working on windows port (sorry for cross > > post) > > > Date: Monday, January 05, 1998 8:49 AM > > > > > > Well, I have a great deal of experience with PC X servers (check > > > out the work URL...). I have to be careful with what I say, as > > > we are a source licensee for one of the PC X server vendors, and > > > I've been inside their sources. I will only give some general > > > comments. > > > > > > 1) From what I have been told by more than one PC X server > > > manufacturer, DirectX is going to be a waste of time. DirectX > > > only gets major performance improvements when it can take over > > > the entire screen. When running in a window, it's not a major > > > win over raw GDI code. As far as I know, none of the PC X server > > > vendors use DirectX. > > > > > > That said - Windows NT 4.0 Service Pack 3 provides most of > > > DirectX 3 for Windows NT. DirectX isn't supported at all prior to > > > SP3, and DirectX 5 support isn't planned to be available until > > > Windows NT 5.0 (which is currently in Beta1). > > > > > > 2) All the PC X servers operate in one of two modes: single-window > > > or multiple-window. Single-window is a traditional X server main > > > window, living in a single Windows window. Basically, the Windows > > > window becomes a single large framebuffer. This is easy to > > implement, > > > but X apps don't coexist well with Windows apps this way. > > > > > > Multi-window mode basically has no visible X root window. Each X > > > top-level window is a Windows top-level window. In this mode, the X > > > server provides some sort of local window manager, so that the X > > apps > > > are both ICCCM-compliant, and windows-friendly. The good ones even > > > recognize Motif window manager hints for decorations, etc. > > > > > > I have never seen anyone use anything other than multi-window mode > > > (well, > > > we do have a couple of ISVs selling turnkey boxes, who I have been > > told > > > do use single-window mode). > > > > > > 3) Palette management is a major headache. In a normal X server, > > the > > > X server controls the hardware palette, and can do what it wants. > > In a > > > PC X server, Windows controls the palette. There's a lot of code > > > involved > > > in getting X color handling to work "right" under Windows. > > > > > > In addition, most of the major PC X server vendors have implemented > > > 8-bit-pseudo-color visuals on top of 16/24/32-bit true-color > > visuals. > > > This > > > is because most PCs these days are in high/true-color mode, and most > > X > > > apps > > > fall down if the default visual isn't 8-bit pseudo-color. As far as > > I > > > know, > > > this is all done with software; I've been told that Windows provides > > no > > > way > > > to get to the RAMDAC to do it in hardware even if the RAMDAC > > supports > > > it. > > > > > > 4) Device management is also a pain (keyboard & mouse), because you > > have > > > to > > > go through windows. > > > > > > 5) Font management is interesting. All the PC X servers I have seen > > > have X > > > bitmap & scaled fonts, but not in .pcf format. They have them in > > > Windows > > > .fon format, and provide their own font compilers. I've never > > > completely > > > understood why they bother with this - if they're going to provide > > > X-specific > > > fonts, why not leave then in X-specific formats? No one has yet > > written > > > a > > > font server that allows use of native Windows fonts, that I have > > seen. > > > > > > -- > > > David Wexelblat Phone: (703) 803-3343 x370 > > > DataFocus Incorporated Fax: (703) 803-3344 > > > 12450 Fair Lakes Circle, Suite 400 mailto:dwex@datafocus.com > > > Fairfax, VA 22033-3821 http://www.datafocus.com > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Alfred Perlstein > > > > Sent: Friday, January 02, 1998 6:31 AM > > > > To: devel@XFree86.Org > > > > Cc: hackers@freebsd.org > > > > Subject: interested in working on windows port (sorry for cross > > > > post) > > > > > > > > (please excuse the cross post, i'm really looking for help and > > this is > > > > a > > > > strange multiplatform subject...) > > > > > > > > I'm interested in making a windows 95/NT port of Xfree86, > > > > i plan on using DirectX to support fast accesses to the graphical > > > > hardware. > > > > > > > > if anyone has the time to answer a couple of questions it would be > > > > greatly > > > > appreciated. > > > > > > > > 1) can anyone recommend a free c/cpp compiler/enviornment for > > this? > > > > i've looked at DJGPP,RSXNT, and the cygnus thingy and so far: > > > > DJGPP doesn't support win32. > > > > RSXNT hardly is docmented and doesn't seem to be useful as a > > > > UNIX to WIN32 > > > > porting tool things like sockets don't seem to be implemented. > > > > cygnus doesn't appeal to me because of hardcore GPL license they > > > > have. > > > > > > > > i do NOT mind giving credit where credit is due... but i'm not > > > > too keen on > > > > releasing my source, i DO however, plan on the product being free. > > > > > > > > 2) if i use direct-X does anyone know if it will work on NT? i > > think > > > > mircosoft doesn't support DirectX on NT, or at least not past > > version > > > > 3... > > > > > > > > 3) what books can i get on the low level details of X? anything > > on > > > > how the > > > > X11 source tree is set up? anyone have any pointers to good > > > > FAQs/tutorials? > > > > > > > > thank you, > > > > -Alfred
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199801051338.NAA02521>