grunwald@flute.cs.uiuc.edu (Dirk Grunwald) (08/17/89)
I don't know what sucess others have had, but I had to include: #ifdef RAL #include <pixrect/pixrect_hs.h> #endif in server/ddx/sun/sun.h and -lpixrect in the server/Imakefile I think the RAL patches assume you're already using the options to allow sunwindows & X to live together.
grunwald@flute.cs.uiuc.edu (Dirk Grunwald) (08/17/89)
I also have to admit that I didn't find the RAL patches to be any faster than the Purdue+ V2.1 patches. I compiled using gcc-1.35.96, and had -DPURDUE -DRAL -DNO_SUN_CG4. The resulting binary was bigger, and the server had some problems (highlighted areas were retained, minor things). The may be due to using gcc 1.35.96 (doubtful) or because I used the Purdue +2.1 patches (more likely) or because I botched the installation (doubtful).
spike@bu-cs.BU.EDU (Spike) (08/18/89)
In article <GRUNWALD.89Aug16172137@flute.cs.uiuc.edu> grunwald@flute.cs.uiuc.edu writes:
<I also have to admit that I didn't find the RAL patches to be any
<faster than the Purdue+ V2.1 patches. I compiled using gcc-1.35.96,
<and had -DPURDUE -DRAL -DNO_SUN_CG4.
<
<The resulting binary was bigger, and the server had some problems
<(highlighted areas were retained, minor things).
I found that it was faster in some cases, but that it had
broken gwm and xtrek rather badly...
->Spike
Software Tool & Diejdi@fridge.Franz.COM (John Irwin) (09/13/89)
In article <GRUNWALD.89Aug16172137@flute.cs.uiuc.edu> grunwald@flute.cs.uiuc.edu writes: > >I also have to admit that I didn't find the RAL patches to be any >faster than the Purdue+ V2.1 patches. I compiled using gcc-1.35.96, >and had -DPURDUE -DRAL -DNO_SUN_CG4. > >The resulting binary was bigger, and the server had some problems >(highlighted areas were retained, minor things). The may be due to >using gcc 1.35.96 (doubtful) or because I used the Purdue +2.1 >patches (more likely) or because I botched the installation (doubtful). I just got it working (after adding -lpixrect, etc) and it seems faster for some operations, especially CopyArea. (Ok, so I don't have any numbers to back this up, having deleted my xstones source -- does anyone?) Also, the binary was smaller (!) on a SunOS4.0 sun4/260. Has anybody got a patch for the highliting problem? (Hint: you'll only see it if you run your Xterm's in white on black mode) -- John jdi@franz.com