te07@edrc.cmu.edu (Thomas Epperly) (07/21/89)
I have a DECstation 3100 running DECwindows(Ultrix Worksystem Software 2.0 I haven't gotten the patch yet), and I would like to replace dxwm with twm or awm. After some work I got both twm and awm to compile, but neither works correctly. They both have trouble with the Session manager window. awm complains "Unkown property 75". The symptoms are kind of hard to describe, but I will try. It is like the Session manager's window becomes part of the background. If I move the Session manager window it moves away, but a copy remains where it used to be. This copy cannot be selected, moved, or iconified. This happens with both twm and awm. Please let me know how to fix this if it can be fixed. When the advertising says that the DECstation uses X, I assumed that it could compile and run X software available on the networks(comp.sources.x). Also, it would be really nice if they included an appropriate imake in the distribution. Tom Epperly Chemical Engineering Univ. of Wisconsin-Madison epperly@chewi.che.wisc.edu epperly@osnome.che.wisc.edu te07@cs.cmu.edu
hartzell@boulder.Colorado.EDU (George Hartzell) (07/21/89)
In article <5586@pt.cs.cmu.edu>, te07@edrc (Thomas Epperly) writes: >I have a DECstation 3100 running DECwindows(Ultrix Worksystem Software 2.0 >I haven't gotten the patch yet), and I would like to replace dxwm with twm >or awm. After some work I got both twm and awm to compile, but neither >works correctly. They both have trouble with the Session manager window. >awm complains "Unkown property 75". The symptoms are kind of hard to >describe, but I will try. It is like the Session manager's window becomes >part of the background. If I move the Session manager window it moves >away, but a copy remains where it used to be. This copy cannot be >selected, moved, or iconified. This happens with both twm and awm. > I'm running twm on a Decstation 3100 without any problem, but am not using the session manager. I am using xdm, which (sortof) qualifies as a session manager I guess. I haven't had any problems with it. Let me know if you want more info. g. George Hartzell (303) 492-4535 MCD Biology, University of Colorado-Boulder, Boulder, CO 80309 hartzell@Boulder.Colorado.EDU ..!{ncar,nbires}!boulder!hartzell
bph@buengc.BU.EDU (Blair P. Houghton) (07/22/89)
In article <5586@pt.cs.cmu.edu> te07@edrc.cmu.edu (Thomas Epperly) writes: >I have a DECstation 3100 running DECwindows(Ultrix Worksystem Software 2.0 >I haven't gotten the patch yet), and I would like to replace dxwm with twm >or awm. After some work I got both twm and awm to compile, but neither >works correctly. They both have trouble with the Session manager window. >awm complains "Unkown property 75". The symptoms are kind of hard to >describe, but I will try. It is like the Session manager's window becomes >part of the background. If I move the Session manager window it moves >away, but a copy remains where it used to be. This copy cannot be >selected, moved, or iconified. This happens with both twm and awm. > >Please let me know how to fix this if it can be fixed. When the >advertising says that the DECstation uses X, I assumed that it could >compile and run X software available on the networks(comp.sources.x). >Also, it would be really nice if they included an appropriate imake in the >distribution. Two possible obvious problems: 1. You are running a different version of X. Around here, we have various machines running X10R4 and X11R2, and in a month or so we may get X11R3. Generally, the differences between R* versions is in the library, Xlib. As I recall, Ultrix 2.0 comes with X10R4. Almost all of the currently snarfable code in the *.*.X groups is X11, probably R3. I don't know if there's any reliable method of determining a program's requirements, other than trying to compile it and run it. You'll need to install Ultrix 3.0, (and then the upgrade/revision Ultrix 3.1, since it's there to fix some bugs, and who needs those?), to get X11 installed and twm to run. It's interesting that they compile but don't run, isn't it? That's because a lot of the Xlib routines operate by interpreting data. For instance, you can specify "expose" as an argument to a (ficticious) XDoSomethingToWin() function, or "iconify", and the like. The XDoSomethingToWin() function must be able to recognize what "expose" and "iconify" mean. Since they are arguments to a function, there is no checking for their semantics when compiling, only that they have type (char *), so the program compiles. Different versions of X may have different versions of XDoSomethingToWin(), in which one may not implement the "iconify" action. When you compile a program written for a version of X different from yours, a program which does use "iconify" as an arg to XDoSomethingToWin(), and link it with your Xlib, your version of the XDoSomethingToWin() function may get confused. Luckily, almost all Xlib routines have intelligent error messages, and a policy that implements them uniformly. Otherwise you'd only get such garbola as "Segmentation Fault" and such, or "unknown error in XDoSomethingToWin", which is even worse, since I for one would be tempted to debug it. 2. I dunno. An opinion (or four): twm is a pig. We have it around here (it's X11 only, as far as I know) and it really sucks up virtual memory and cpu time. I don't have to run finger to know when twm-lovers are on the system. It has a few snazzy bells and whistles, but I still prefer the sleek efficacy of uwm. awm never thrilled me, either. dxwm is marginally slower and heavier than twm, though, so you can actually see an improvement. --Blair "...but I hold forth..."
alex@wolf.umbc.edu (Alex Crain) (07/22/89)
[twm + DECWindows on a PMAX] > The symptoms are kind of hard to >describe, but I will try. It is like the Session manager's window becomes >part of the background. If I move the Session manager window it moves >away, but a copy remains where it used to be. This copy cannot be >selected, moved, or iconified. This happens with both twm and awm. I'm running a PMAX with the Xmfb server and the MIT clients. There appears to be a bug in the server that causes it to "lose" pixmaps, which then float on the display, altough you can't touch them. The biggest hassle with this is that these pixmap images are on the surface of the display, and thus obscure other images. My favorite (well, not really) is when the clock image gets lost. THe result is that the clock gets obscured by an old pixmap, so time stands still. Of course, since the covering image looks exactly like xclock, you don't find out until you realize that it's been 3:15 for the last 4 hours :-). ################################# :alex. #Disclamer: Anyone who agrees # University of Maryland Baltimore County #with me deserves what they get.# alex@umbc3.umbc.edu ################################# alex%nerwin.UUCP@umbc3.umbc.edu
joel@pandora.pa.dec.com (Joel McCormack) (07/24/89)
There was a horrible region bug in the first release of the DECStation 3100 server. The bug was actually lurking since time immemorial; my faster region code just happened to depend on a certain boolean reflecting reality, which it didn't. The most obvious symptom of this bug was lost screen areas: some area on the screen would become ``on top'' of everything else, and whatever was last there remained there forever. This behavior did not ever seem happen using dxwm, but it happened with uwm and its descendants. In any case, this bug should be fixed in the Ultrix 3.1/UWS 2.1 maintenance release. - Joel McCormack (decwrl!joel, joel@decwrl.dec.com)