brian@amc.UUCP (Brian Crowley) (04/09/89)
Can somebody tell me where I can get a copy?
Thanks in advance.
Brian Crowley
Applied Microsystems Corp.
Redmond Washington
...!uw-beaver!amc!brian
"In order to lead a balanced life, if you have a dog which adores you,
go buy a cat to ignore you" - unknownbob@oz.cis.ohio-state.edu (Bob Sutterfield) (04/10/89)
In article <948@amc.UUCP> brian@amc.UUCP (Brian Crowley) writes:
Can somebody tell me where I can get a copy?
Look on expo.lcs.mit.edu:contrib/Purdue.2.[01]-tar.Z. You'll also
need the GNU C compiler, from prep.ai.mit.edu:/u/emacs/gcc.tar-1.34.Z.nancie@hal.CSS.GOV (Nancie Matson) (11/10/89)
I have heard alot of people mention a set to Speedups for the X window environment written by Purdue, and I am interested in finding out where I can get a copy of the patches. I have already installed the 8 patches for X11R3 that were included on the release tape, but the enviroment is very slow. It doesn't help that I am using a Sun 3/110 with only 4 meg, running OS4.0.3 I have tried to contact an X archive location, at archives@mcf, but each time I try the mail is bounced back. (oh well...). Also, How can I get ahold of the Patch9. This was not included on the Release tape I recieved. Thanx in advance. nancie@hal.css.gov
nancie@hal.CSS.GOV (Nancie Matson) (02/13/90)
I was wondering if the current version of X (X11R4) has incorporated the Purdue Speedups Version 2.0 or 2.1 to speed up the mfb code. Also, I was told that the folks at Purdue were working on a version for the cfb code, and I would like to know if this has been completed/ or included in the source for X11R4. Thanx in Advance. nancie
keith@EXPO.LCS.MIT.EDU (Keith Packard) (02/13/90)
> I was wondering if the current version of X (X11R4) has > incorporated the Purdue Speedups Version 2.0 or 2.1 to > speed up the mfb code. All of the purdue speedups which produced measurable performance increases were incorporated into X11R4. Additional speedups engineered here at MIT are also included which produce significant performance improvements for text, copyarea and 0-width lines. > Also, I was told that the folks > at Purdue were working on a version for the cfb code, > and I would like to know if this has been completed/ > or included in the source for X11R4. The CFB code for R4 was written entirely at MIT and provides reasonable (some would say "pretty darn good") performance for most 8-bit frame buffers. Some ideas from the Purdue monochrome speedups were incorporated, but the structure of the monochrome speedups was not generally useful on an 8-bit display. Keith Packard MIT X Consortium
jg@max.crl.dec.com (Jim Gettys) (02/13/90)
Keith is being too modest. He did a super job on the CFB code. With the exception of a some things he's done since R4 came out, most things are about as good as you can get using portable C code. You may be able to tune things a bit better for a given machine/frame buffer combination, but that is about it. It has been fun to watch Keith and Joel McCormack (implementor of the DECstation cfb server, who has been known to write MIPS assembly code occasionally, when the optimizer won't do cross basic block optimizations!) compete with each other on who has the fastest implementation of a given function. By the consortium's standards, Joel is cheating when he wins that way, but by product metrics, Joel isn't cheating, just adding value (though Joel hasn't written much assembly code). - Jim
psgrp@thumper.bellcore.com (PSGRP Account) (02/14/90)
In article <9002122217.AA27286@xenon.lcs.mit.edu> keith@EXPO.LCS.MIT.EDU (Keith Packard) writes: >> I was wondering if the current version of X (X11R4) has >> incorporated the Purdue Speedups Version 2.0 or 2.1 to >> speed up the mfb code. >All of the purdue speedups which produced measurable performance increases >were incorporated into X11R4. Additional speedups engineered here at MIT >are also included which produce significant performance improvements >for text, copyarea and 0-width lines. I am revisiting an old problem that I have. I didn't really get enough help to fix the problem. So I am trying again. I am running on a SUN 3/60 (SUNOS 4.0.2) using X11R3. The 3/60 has two frame buffers, one monochrome and one color. Suntools actually takes advantage of this hardware configuration and uses both frame buffers as one display. However, X treats them as two separate desktops. This is all ok, but I ran into a problem on my monochrome desktop. I got overstriking characters and it looked like the fonts were messed up. I was told at the time that the purdue speedups had something to do with it and I didn't get any further. Is this problem taken care of in X11R4. I see a lot of problems with R4 on the net. Is it stable enough to switch? If someone knows more details on the fix for R3, I would also appreciate your reply. > Keith Packard > MIT X Consortium -- ....bellcore!rruxh!monnie or rruxh!monnie@thumper.bellcore.com