rajohn@hubcap.clemson.edu (r alan johnson) (04/28/89)
I'm interested in some sort of prog or dev. tool that will allow me to write code that I can generate in a PC environment (DOS, not unix) and when then ported to X will run as well. Simply put, I want some sort of way to write X apps (or at least use calls that X will understand) that runs under DOS, without unix, networking, etc. Is this a dumb request? Am I missing something terribly important? Any and all input will be appreciated. Lacking help on this problem, is (are) there any tool(s) that will allow dev. and implementation under DOS that can then be ported easily to a Sun wstation? Again, and and all help! Thanks, R. Alan Johnson (rajohn@hubcap.clemson.edu) p.s. fortran is preferable, but C or some deriv. is OK too.
pajerek@isctsse.UUCP (Don Pajerek) (04/29/89)
In article <5309@hubcap.clemson.edu> rajohn@hubcap.clemson.edu (r alan johnson) writes: >I'm interested in some sort of prog or dev. tool that will allow me to write >code that I can generate in a PC environment (DOS, not unix) and when then >ported to X will run as well. Simply put, I want some sort of >way to write X apps (or at least use calls that X will understand) that runs >under DOS, without unix, networking, etc. Either you're missing something, or I am. Basically, the problem with what you want to do is that X applications employ the 'Client/Server' model; i.e., there are minimally TWO programs running, the client and the server. Now, there's no reason why both can't be running on the same machine, unless that machine happens to be a single-tasking DOS machine. If you really are restricted to PC's, then you will need two networked machines. One of them will run an X server (there are several commercial implementations of the X server for PC's under DOS). The other will run your client applications. > R. Alan Johnson (rajohn@hubcap.clemson.edu) Don Pajerek
wastebasket@LARRY.MCRCIM.MCGILL.EDU (der Mouse, really mouse@...) (04/30/89)
>> I'm interested in some sort of prog or dev. tool that will allow me >> to write code that I can generate in a PC environment (DOS, not >> unix) and when then ported to X will run as well. > Either you're missing something, or I am. Basically, the problem > with what you want to do is that X applications employ the > 'Client/Server' model; i.e., there are minimally TWO programs > running, the client and the server. Now, there's no reason why both > can't be running on the same machine, unless that machine happens to > be a single-tasking DOS machine. There are not *necessarily* two programs running; one could design a library with the same interface spec as Xlib but which included the actions the server would normally take as well. Alternatively, on an IBM PC family machine, one could build the server as a TSR program and have the Xlib calls use one of the unused soft interrupts to request the services of the server. (This would imply the equivalent of synchronous mode, but it's a lot better than nothing.) I have no idea whether anyone has built such a thing. der Mouse old: mcgill-vision!mouse new: mouse@larry.mcrcim.mcgill.edu (Replies will NOT reach me; use the signature address. This is an attempt to sidestep the flood of failure messages that inevitably follow any mail to xpert.)
paolucci@snll-arpagw.UUCP (Sam Paolucci) (04/30/89)
In article <225@isctsse.UUCP> pajerek@isctsse.UUCP (Donald Pajerek) writes: ->In article <5309@hubcap.clemson.edu> rajohn@hubcap.clemson.edu (r alan johnson) writes: ->>I'm interested in some sort of prog or dev. tool that will allow me to write ->>code that I can generate in a PC environment (DOS, not unix) and when then ->>ported to X will run as well. Simply put, I want some sort of ->>way to write X apps (or at least use calls that X will understand) that runs ->>under DOS, without unix, networking, etc. -> ->Either you're missing something, or I am. Basically, the problem with ->what you want to do is that X applications employ the 'Client/Server' ->model; i.e., there are minimally TWO programs running, the client and ->the server. Now, there's no reason why both can't be running on the same ->machine, unless that machine happens to be a single-tasking DOS machine. -> ->If you really are restricted to PC's, then you will need two networked ->machines. One of them will run an X server (there are several commercial ->implementations of the X server for PC's under DOS). The other will run ->your client applications. Of course, you could also use an Amiga which has a multi-tasking OS and which runs the server and clients at the same time. X11 has just been released on the Amiga, and a bunch of clients are also included. Xlib and the toolkit libraries have been promised in the near future. -- -+= SAM =+- "the best things in life are free" ARPA: paolucci@snll-arpagw.llnl.gov
Dion_L_Johnson@cup.portal.com (05/02/89)
R. Alan Johnson wrote:
[ .. some deleted stuff .... ]
If you really are restricted to PC's, then you will need two networked
machines. One of them will run an X server (there are several commercial
implementations of the X server for PC's under DOS). The other will run
your client applications.
> R. Alan Johnson (rajohn@hubcap.clemson.edu)
Or, if you prefer to avoid networked DOS, there are UNIX
implementations that run on PCs!
SCO is just starting to ship developer versions of SCO Xsight under
SCO UNIX for 386 machines.
- Dion L. Johnson (dion_l_johnson@cup.portal.com)
Don Pajerekbob@eriador.prime.com (05/05/89)
>> Or, if you prefer to avoid networked DOS, there are UNIX >> implementations that run on PCs! >> SCO is just starting to ship developer versions of SCO Xsight under >> SCO UNIX for 386 machines. >> - Dion L. Johnson (dion_l_johnson@cup.portal.com) I think that most of these responses miss the point. There is nothing about X which *dictates* that it run over a network or on a multitasking system. Period. You could easily right a graphics library on the PC which had the same API as Xlib. You could even do event handling the same way. You could then take some X application and recompile it on a PC and it would work. bob pellegrino Prime Computer, Inc.
herrarte@mcs.anl.gov (Virginia Herrarte) (02/27/91)
I would appreciate some advice from anyone using X on a PC as to what the best packages available are. I use X on a Sun workstation at work and I am trying to decide if it would be worthwhile to try to get it on my PC at home. Thanks. Vicky Herrarte herrarte@achilles.ctd.anl.gov herrarte@mcs.anl.gov
cressler@hpcupt1.cup.hp.com (Scott Cressler) (02/28/91)
You sort of asked two questions: what is the good "X on a PC" package, and how do I get X at home? I don't have a good answer on the latter, partly because "it depends" and partly because *I* don't have anything. However, I'd just throw out the good solutions I've heard being used: a GraphOn X terminal (which could work across a modem to your work workstation) or some sort of UN*X on your PC at home (essentially converting your PC into a workstation). I also believe something called DesqView (which I have not looked into much but which I think is sort of a MS Windows competitor) might support local X. As to "X on a PC", i.e. *displaying* X windows on a PC, XVision from VisionWare (UniPress or GSS in the U.S.) is *excellent*. It runs under (with?) Windows 3.0 on a PC (with 2 meg, a LAN card, and networking software :-) and will display either an entire X environment in a Win3 window or (and this is the part I love) a single X client window in a single Win3 window. If you're widgets are similar enough to Win3 (e.g. OSF/Motif), you wouldn't even have to know it was an X client! Scott.
dga@cs.brown.edu (Daniel Gerardo Aliaga) (03/24/91)
This might have been asked before but, is there any X11 server that runs
on a 386 or 486 machine (MIT X11 R4 if possible). I now there is X client
equivalent that allows you to run off a X server, but I would like the PC
to be the server and client.
Thanks,
dga
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Daniel G. Aliaga '91
XXX XXX XXXXX Brown University
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX "Real men write self modifying code"