yong@pupthy.princeton.edu (Young Rene) (05/28/91)
Just curious: Is there going to be a X-window server program on Unix-PC? mgr is nice, but very few useful programs exists. Is VIDPAL hardware patch helpful for porting X-Window? I heard a few people have replaced the 5 1/4 floppy drive with 720K ones, how is this done?
jlowrey@skat.usc.edu (John 'Fritz' Lowrey) (05/29/91)
Don't count on it!
X-Windows is great if you have MIPS and RAM and disk capacity to
spare. According to a recent Unix Week artical (13 May, 1991 p55) the
minimum functional X-Windows system needs 4MIPS. We get about 1MIPS out
of the well loved 3b1. It goes on the say that a networked X-Manager needs
approximately "1/2 to 1 gigabyte of additional fileserver diskspace..." for
swapping. Call me kooky, but the 67meg 3b1 limit looks a bit puny in
comparison. To top it all off, the stated RAM requirements look to be about
16meg for X11R4.
What I suppose this all amounts to is that the 3b1 was never intended
to run X-Windows, nor was X-Windows written in anticipation of use on a 3b1.
Later...
Fritz
--
J. "Fritz" Lowrey
Transcend the Bullshit USC Computer Consulting
Internet: jlowrey@usc.edu
UUCP: !uunet!usc!jlowreyyong@pupthy.princeton.edu (Young Rene) (05/29/91)
-Don't count on it! - X-Windows is great if you have MIPS and RAM and disk capacity to -spare. According to a recent Unix Week artical (13 May, 1991 p55) the -minimum functional X-Windows system needs 4MIPS. We get about 1MIPS out -of the well loved 3b1. It goes on the say that a networked X-Manager needs -approximately "1/2 to 1 gigabyte of additional fileserver diskspace..." for -swapping. Call me kooky, but the 67meg 3b1 limit looks a bit puny in -comparison. To top it all off, the stated RAM requirements look to be about -16meg for X11R4. - - What I suppose this all amounts to is that the 3b1 was never intended -to run X-Windows, nor was X-Windows written in anticipation of use on a 3b1. - - Later... - Fritz Well, I know it is very hard to make X working on 3b1, but maybe I am missing something here. On the Macintosh, the MacX application is about 1-2 Meg, and it runs on a MacII with 2M (barely though). Huge programs like mathematica also runs fine on a MacII, the application even fit in a 720K floppy. It is still hard for me to believe 4M/67M is not enough to run X ...
dnichols@ceilidh.beartrack.com (DoN Nichols) (05/29/91)
In article <10144@idunno.Princeton.EDU> yong@pupthy.princeton.edu (Young Rene) writes: >-Don't count on it! >- X-Windows is great if you have MIPS and RAM and disk capacity to >-spare. According to a recent Unix Week artical (13 May, 1991 p55) the >-minimum functional X-Windows system needs 4MIPS. We get about 1MIPS out >-of the well loved 3b1. It goes on the say that a networked X-Manager needs >-approximately "1/2 to 1 gigabyte of additional fileserver diskspace..." for >-swapping. Call me kooky, but the 67meg 3b1 limit looks a bit puny in >-comparison. To top it all off, the stated RAM requirements look to be about >-16meg for X11R4. Well, the /usr/bin/X11 directory on my Sun 2/120 (68010 cpu, 10MHZ) is about 16MB, but the executable Xsun is only about a Megabyte. If there is adequate resolution on the 3b1's screen (though I don't see it running the 80x65 xterm windows legibly) I guess that it could be persuaded to run X11R4, but I'd re-format that hard disk, giving more space to swap, since there are LOTS of 1/2MEG executables in that directory, and you tend to have several loaded at any given time. Nothing is shown by size(1) to be bigger than 1MB, and virtual memory is a wonderful thing. (But don't ask ME to port it! :-) As far as speed goes, The sun benchmarks out just a bit faster on the dhrystone than the 3b1, both using gcc. However, screen writes are significantly faster to my perception in the Sun, so I guess that there's lots of special hardware in the Sun helping out there. Happy porting Don. -- Donald Nichols (DoN.) | Voice (Days): (703) 664-1585 D&D Data | Voice (Eves): (703) 938-4564 Disclaimer: from here - None | Email: <dnichols@ceilidh.beartrack.com> --- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---
jlowrey@skat.usc.edu (John 'Fritz' Lowrey) (05/29/91)
In article <10144@idunno.Princeton.EDU> yong@pupthy.princeton.edu (Young Rene) writes: >-Don't count on it! >- X-Windows is great if you have MIPS and RAM and disk capacity to >-spare. According to a recent Unix Week artical (13 May, 1991 p55) the >-minimum functional X-Windows system needs 4MIPS. We get about 1MIPS out >-of the well loved 3b1. It goes on the say that a networked X-Manager needs >-approximately "1/2 to 1 gigabyte of additional fileserver diskspace..." for >-swapping. Call me kooky, but the 67meg 3b1 limit looks a bit puny in >-comparison. To top it all off, the stated RAM requirements look to be about >-16meg for X11R4. >- >- What I suppose this all amounts to is that the 3b1 was never intended >-to run X-Windows, nor was X-Windows written in anticipation of use on a 3b1. >- >- Later... >- Fritz > Well, I know it is very hard to make X working on 3b1, but maybe >I am missing something here. On the Macintosh, the MacX application is >about 1-2 Meg, and it runs on a MacII with 2M (barely though). Huge programs >like mathematica also runs fine on a MacII, the application even fit in >a 720K floppy. It is still hard for me to believe 4M/67M is not enough to >run X ... Not exactly true. One correction to my own post, the magazine was "Unix Today" not "Unix Week". The origional poster (whose name I no longer can recall, sorry) asked about 3b1 X-Server aplications (ie a windows manager etc...). The responce I posted was a reaction to this. I have used MacX on our computers here at 'SC, but you must remember that MacX runs the X-App on the _Unix_ box and just gives the graphics output on the Macs screen. In this case your 1-2MB on disk and 2MB RAM are completely slaved to supporting monochrome graphics SLOWLY. Not the best solution. Perhaps some way of doing something similar on the 3b1 could be concidered. Remember, though, that the 3b1 monitor is not huge (720x350ish). Recomended screen size for an X terminal is 1 megapixel. Might be an interesting project though... Fritz -- J. "Fritz" Lowrey Transcend the Bullshit USC Computer Consulting Internet: jlowrey@usc.edu UUCP: !uunet!usc!jlowrey
bruce@balilly (Bruce Lilly) (05/30/91)
In article <10132@idunno.Princeton.EDU> yong@pupthy.princeton.edu (Young Rene) writes: >Just curious: Is there going to be a X-window server program on > Unix-PC? mgr is nice, but very few useful programs exists. Probably not. Not because it's difficult (first step would be a driver that handles the keyboard and display) or because of memory or spped problems, but because it's not worth the effort. Prices of computer hardware are declining -- it's possible to get a system running X with a monochrome gray-scale display for a few thousand dollars. It would probably take quite a few man-weeks of time to port X to the 3b1, which has a small (720x ~300) 1-bit deep (no "gray"-scale) green display. Unless your time is nearly worthless, that's more expensive than buying an X terminal or small system. > Is VIDPAL hardware patch helpful for porting X-Window? Nope. It does nothing to address size or depth or pixel aspect ratio of the display, which are the biggest limitations. -- Bruce Lilly blilly!balilly!bruce@sonyd1.Broadcast.Sony.COM
tgeorge@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (timothy.d.george) (05/31/91)
In article <1991May29.041204.21680@ceilidh.beartrack.com> dnichols@ceilidh.beartrack.com (DoN Nichols) writes: >In article <10144@idunno.Princeton.EDU> yong@pupthy.princeton.edu (Young Rene) writes: >>-Don't count on it! >>- X-Windows is great if you have MIPS and RAM and disk capacity to >>-spare. According to a recent Unix Week artical (13 May, 1991 p55) the /* TEXT DELETED */ > > Well, the /usr/bin/X11 directory on my Sun 2/120 (68010 cpu, 10MHZ) >is about 16MB, but the executable Xsun is only about a Megabyte. If there >is adequate resolution on the 3b1's screen (though I don't see it running >the 80x65 xterm windows legibly) I guess that it could be persuaded to run >X11R4, but I'd re-format that hard disk, giving more space to swap, sinceA /* TEXT DELETED */ >-- >Donald Nichols (DoN.) | Voice (Days): (703) 664-1585 >D&D Data | Voice (Eves): (703) 938-4564 >Disclaimer: from here - None | Email: <dnichols@ceilidh.beartrack.com> > --- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero --- I have already porting the majority of the client side of X11R4 on the 3b1, and am now working on the sever port. From what I can tell, with the help of the VIDPAL, it should be very similiar to the Xsun server, with new drivers for mouse and keyboard. I let everyone know how it is progressing. Tom Roehr attmail!scuzzy!tomr P.S. Hi Lenny!
tgeorge@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (timothy.d.george) (05/31/91)
In article <1991May29.224021.27786@blilly.UUCP> bruce@balilly (Bruce Lilly) writes: >In article <10132@idunno.Princeton.EDU> yong@pupthy.princeton.edu (Young Rene) writes: >>Just curious: Is there going to be a X-window server program on >> Unix-PC? mgr is nice, but very few useful programs exists. > >Probably not. Not because it's difficult (first step would be a driver >that handles the keyboard and display) or because of memory or spped >problems, but because it's not worth the effort. Prices of computer >hardware are declining -- it's possible to get a system running X with a >monochrome gray-scale display for a few thousand dollars. It would >probably take quite a few man-weeks of time to port X to the 3b1, which >has a small (720x ~300) 1-bit deep (no "gray"-scale) green display. Unless >your time is nearly worthless, that's more expensive than buying an X >terminal or small system. > >> Is VIDPAL hardware patch helpful for porting X-Window? > >Nope. It does nothing to address size or depth or pixel aspect ratio of >the display, which are the biggest limitations. > >-- > Bruce Lilly blilly!balilly!bruce@sonyd1.Broadcast.Sony.COM But the VIDPAL simplifies the access to the screen, making it very similiar to a sun for the port. (Notice that MGR runs on Suns and 3b1's). Also, doing a port would certainly give you experience in writing X code. And some of the X terminals avaliable are 720*348 and cost around $1000. Without disk! The port on the server should not take more than 2 man weeks of work. Hopefully I'll get some more time soon to finish the X3b1 server in June. Tom Roehr attmail!scuzzy!tomr