Title: | DECWINDOWS 26-JAN-89 to 29-NOV-90 |
Notice: | See 1639.0 for VMS V5.3 kit; 2043.0 for 5.4 IFT kit |
Moderator: | STAR::VATNE |
Created: | Mon Oct 30 1989 |
Last Modified: | Mon Dec 31 1990 |
Last Successful Update: | Fri Jun 06 1997 |
Number of topics: | 3726 |
Total number of notes: | 19516 |
GeoQuest Systems is a key vendor in the Oil & Gas Exploration market and is currently porting to DECwindows, which they have wholeheartedly embraced. Because their interpretation workstation offering requires dual heads they use RasterTek heads and graphics. As a result, they need to write an X server driver for the RasterTek. (This will also protect their VMS installed base) The Server questions below are related to this effort. GQ is eagerly awaiting the release of DW V2.0 which may contain some of this information but they simply cannot wait. They must have this finished ASAP. Any help on these question is greatly appreciated! If this note is better posted elsewhere please let me know the best place for it. Thank you, Peter August 21, 1989 GeoQuest X-Server Questions --------------------------- 1) Are there differences in the MIT sample server DIX and the VMS server DIX functions? a) If so, what are the differences and the functions between DIX and DDX for VMS? b) How were UNIX systems calls supported under the VMS server? c) Under UNIX there are execution time systems calls & procedures, e.g. gettime Many are unique to UNIX, do not exist exactly the same under VMS. GeoQuest assumes DEC has had to do something to support this functionality in VMS. How did DEC do it? Is it possible to link to DEC's implementation of the functions? How? Specific examples are; bcopy bzero bcomp ffs hypt d) Does VMS X server & library support multiple displays on a single host? e) If so, was standard X naming convention for displays followed? [hostname:[:]s.d f) Has DEC stayed w/ naming conventions established in the sample (highly UNIX oriented) server for structures and system level defines or has DEC had to change some of these for VMS? If some are changed what are the changes? g) To make DDX work we need to link to or have access to a module that resolves externals. e.g. The parameter MAX_SCREENS is normally defined in a C include file for which we do not have source. We need Digital's version to remain consistent. How can we resolve need for definitions?? Mouse Button Questions ---------------------- 1) GeoQuest has a number of commands that they want to use MOUSE BUTTON commands for. Their concern is which mouse buttons are available? The Style Guide implies, for instance, that mouse buttons 2 & 3 are available for general use when in fact they have specific assignments in various DEC products under DW, i.e. cut & paste in DECwrite. The real question is how will Digital guide the use and assignment in various vendor packages of mouse buttons and other commands so that users don't have to learn that Mouse button 3 means a different command in the various packages that they must use? GQ is concerned about being consistent and does not want to be careful not to select a command that DEC will choose for its own use in future products. b) Given that there will be infinite combinations of commands created to do the variety of commands needed, does DEC have now or are there plans to set up a "clearing house" in order to help the thousands of vendors understand what is being used and for what so that there will be some consistancy? Is there a mechanism for addressing conflicts? c) GQ has read and assimilated the styly guide but feels that more guidelines are needed to remain consistent. Is this forthcoming? Are these questions new? Are other vendors asking similar question and if so what is DEC telling them? MOTIF ----- a) Rumor to the effect that ULTRIX MOTIF available now, VMS MOTIF not for a year. Is this true? b) GeoQuest is nervous about writing to DW without knowing what the changes will be for MOTIF. What information is available to help them understand what the differences will be like? c) How much will the style guide change with MOTIF?
T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1309.1 | SDSVAX::SWEENEY | Honey, I iconified the kids | Mon Aug 21 1989 11:47 | 16 | |
You are asking a lot of questions about server development. Nothing associated with DECwindows in VMS or UNIX is deliverable in a form that would aid customers to create a server. Sources to the DECwindows server as you have guessed are not based on the MIT sample server and are not distributed. Your customers concerns should be around the new exposed transport interface in DECwindows V2. VMS Field test kits and documentation have been available for this for over a month. Regarding Motif, nothing official from DEC has been announced. In the OSF conference "availability of Motif" is being discussed. I'd hate to see this conference cluttered up with more DEC-bashing for not having immediate availability of Motif, one conference is sufficient for that purpose. | |||||
1309.2 | Too many V2 F.T. sites | CURIE::HODGE | Mon Aug 21 1989 14:32 | 9 | |
Re: .1 I concur regarding MOTIF and will post that part of my note in the OSF notes file. Much of what is needed regarding the Server will be coming out in V2 but there are already too many Field Test sites. Thus, I am turning to you gurus out there for help | |||||
1309.3 | SITBUL::KLEINSORGE | X Windows. Live the nightmare. | Mon Aug 21 1989 16:15 | 10 | |
Gosh, an awful lot of the server code seems to be very much a growth from the original sample-servers. And the DIX code still seems to be pretty portable. But I can't imagine that it makes any difference unless DEC is providing support for writing DECW$FOO_DDX_XX.EXE images by customers. An interesting idea, but are we? It would seem that any valid X11 server "should" work just fine on VMS. | |||||
1309.4 | Minor nit | KASINO::NEIDECKER | Software motion pictures | Tue Aug 22 1989 06:41 | 7 |
Minor nit re.1: The ULTRIX PMAX servers don't use the common server code but the MIT code. If I'm not mistaken, they plan to get rid of the common server code anyways, as at least R4 code from the X consortium will be a lot better in the DIX code. | |||||
1309.5 | 282.* for multi-head discussion | LBDUCK::SCHOELLER | Who's on first? | Tue Aug 22 1989 14:02 | 8 |
Peter, You might also want to look at 282.* (esp last few replies) about V2 support for multi-head stations. You might be able to encourage them to use multi-head stations with our heads instead of/in addition to the 3rd party's. Dick |