debra@wsinis03.info.win.tue.nl (Paul De Bra) (04/11/91)
This message is primarily intended for Thomas Roell, but our mailer was not able to find a path to informatik.tu-muenchen.dbp.de (Host unknown) This is a description of some circumstances under which i got the X386a server (compiled for AT&T sVr3.2.1 with xqueue and no TCP/IP) to lock up. Switching VT's unlocks the server. I have not yet recompiled the binaries. Several of the distributed binaries work as is. The cursor usually freezes up under the following circumstances: - use Optima Mega ET4000 based vga board with 1Mbyte. - resolution 1144x900 on an EIZO 9070S. - use olwm (don't know if that matters but i never use twm) - activate a program with a small window, like xeyes. - try to move the window around (push left button in top bar and drag window) other circumstances which sometimes cause the cursor to freeze up: - selecting something from an open-look menu` - moving over the pallette in xfig - resizing windows Hope this is enough to give Thomas a clue. I'm willing to try a possible fix. I have an AT&T 3.2.1 and enough disk-space to have the first X-source tape on line (and compile). Paul. (debra@win.tue.nl, debra@research.att.com)
fangchin@leland.Stanford.EDU (Chin Fang) (04/12/91)
In article <1884@svin02.info.win.tue.nl> debra@info.win.tue.nl writes: >This message is primarily intended for Thomas Roell, but our mailer >was not able to find a path to informatik.tu-muenchen.dbp.de >(Host unknown) > Tey remove that de from informatik.tu-muenchen.dbp.de, ie, use informatik.tu-muenchen.dbp instead. This works for me. Otherwise I would get the same error message. Chin Fang Mechanical Engineering Department Stanford University fangchin@leland.stanford.edu
cpcahil@virtech.uucp (Conor P. Cahill) (04/12/91)
The amount of traffic related to X386 is picking up steadily and will
probably consume this newsgroup. So, what do you think about putting
together a separate newsgroup: comp.unix.sysv386.x386 or comp.windows.x.x386
which is dedicated to this product?
What do you think?
--
Conor P. Cahill (703)430-9247 Virtual Technologies, Inc.
uunet!virtech!cpcahil 46030 Manekin Plaza, Suite 160
Sterling, VA 22170 jstark@magrethea.matrox.com (John A. Stark) (04/13/91)
In article <1991Apr12.122901.379@virtech.uucp>, cpcahil@virtech.uucp (Conor P. Cahill) writes: > together a separate newsgroup: comp.unix.sysv386.x386 or comp.windows.x.x386 > which is dedicated to this product? > Or at least urge those who are having problems with X386 to post into the proper newsgroup, which is comp.windows.x. I am getting tired of slogging through X Window related stuff in a Sysv UNIX newsgroup. > What do you think? I agree whole-heartedly. -- | John A. Stark | email: jstark@magrethea.matrox.com | | Software Design Engineer | uunet: ..!uunet!matrox!magrethea!jstark | | Matrox Electronic Systems | tele.: (514) 685-7230 ext. 2312 | | "It's all fun and games until someone loses conciousness" |
cmurcko@Topsail.ORG (Chuck Murcko) (04/14/91)
In article <1991Apr13.162338.20814@pandora.matrox.com> jstark@magrethea.matrox.com writes: > >Or at least urge those who are having problems with X386 to post into the >proper newsgroup, which is comp.windows.x. I am getting tired of slogging through >X Window related stuff in a Sysv UNIX newsgroup. > I hate to remind you of this, but this is X386, a 386 Unix thingie. Most of the problems I've seen (or at least SOME of 'em) are system level, and also relevant to other 386 X product users. I see system specific X-related stuff on most all other system specific newsgroups. However, there is a movement to set up a user mailing list for this. Comp.windows.x seems to be more for generic X stuff. Those types of queries aren't what I've seen here. I agree with Conor about the volume picking up as more people use it. Maybe it does rate its own group. 'Till then, try using your kill file. That will avoid wading through all the X386 and other stuff to get to what you want to see. -- Chuck Murcko The Topsail Group 538 E. Church Rd., Elkins Park, PA 19117 Internet: cmurcko@topsail.Topsail.ORG UUCP: ...!uunet!lgnp1!gvlv2!topsail!cmurcko
ejm@coyote.datalog.com (E.J. McKernan) (04/14/91)
In article <1991Apr12.122901.379@virtech.uucp> cpcahil@virtech.uucp (Conor P. Cahill) writes: > >The amount of traffic related to X386 is picking up steadily and will >probably consume this newsgroup. So, what do you think about putting >together a separate newsgroup: comp.unix.sysv386.x386 or comp.windows.x.x386 >which is dedicated to this product? > >What do you think? Just what the doctor ordered! Comp.windows.x.x386 sounds like the name to go with. -- /|_|\ Datalog Consulting, Tucson, AZ ( . . ) ejm@datalog.com \ / ...!noao!datalog.com!ejm \_/
witr@rwwa.COM (Robert Withrow) (04/16/91)
In article <1884@svin02.info.win.tue.nl> debra@info.win.tue.nl writes: >This is a description of some circumstances under which i got the >X386a server (compiled for AT&T sVr3.2.1 with xqueue and no TCP/IP) >to lock up. Switching VT's unlocks the server. There are a number of race conditions in the Xqueue support in current versions of X386. I fixed them recently (for SVR4), but then my system disk crashed and I lost all of the changes. I will re-create them and send them to Thomas. Someone will still have to retrofit the changes to SVR3.x... -- --- Robert Withrow, R.W. Withrow Associates, Swampscott MA 01907 USA Tel: +1 617 598 4480, Fax: +1 617 598 4430, Net: witr@rwwa.COM
dvb@emisle.uucp (David Van Beveren) (04/20/91)
In article <1991Apr14.022422.6177@coyote.datalog.com> ejm@coyote.datalog.com (E.J. McKernan) writes: >In article <1991Apr12.122901.379@virtech.uucp> cpcahil@virtech.uucp (Conor P. Cahill) writes: >> >>The amount of traffic related to X386 is picking up steadily and will >>probably consume this newsgroup. So, what do you think about putting >>together a separate newsgroup: comp.unix.sysv386.x386 or comp.windows.x.x386 >>which is dedicated to this product? >> >>What do you think? > >Just what the doctor ordered! > >Comp.windows.x.x386 sounds like the name to go with. > How about a little more general: comp.windows.x.sysv386. X386 is not the only sysv386 x-windows product. (Just the best :^) ) And there are some issues that relate to more than X386. That would take a lot of traffic from this group, and some from comp.windows.x. I am in favor of such a move. -- David Van Beveren INTERNET: emisle!dvb@ism.isc.com EIS ltd. Professional Software Services UUCP: ..uunet!emisle!dvb voice: (818) 587-1247
ejm@coyote.datalog.com (E.J. McKernan) (04/21/91)
In article <1991Apr20.062159.7333@emisle.uucp> dvb@emisle.UUCP (David Van Beveren) writes: > >How about a little more general: > comp.windows.x.sysv386. >X386 is not the only sysv386 x-windows product. (Just the best :^) ) And there >are some issues that relate to more than X386. > >That would take a lot of traffic from this group, and some from comp.windows.x. Can't argue with that. Sounds good here. -- /|_|\ Datalog Consulting, Tucson, AZ ( . . ) ejm@datalog.com \ / ...!noao!datalog.com!ejm \_/