Author Topic: xfree86  (Read 3636 times)

jjjustjjjay

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 17
    • View Profile
xfree86
« on: 2010.02.16, 06:46:05 »
Hey Y'all
 I have a unix server with a lot of graphical porgrams i use and i read that you could install xfree86 on os2 or ecom. well i have ecom 1.2 and i cant find a website with the instructions. please help


-Thanks

RobertM

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2034
    • View Profile
    • A.I.BuiltPC - using OS/2 Warp Server & eComStation for Custom Web and Database Solutions
Re: xfree86
« Reply #1 on: 2010.02.16, 06:59:12 »
Hi Jay,

You may find these threads helpful:

http://www.os2world.com/cgi-bin/ultraboard/UltraBoard.cgi?action=Headlines&BID=56
(all sorts of things on the subject, though older content than the other two links)

http://www.os2world.com/forum/index.php/topic,527.0.html
(installation tips and more)

http://www.os2notes.gotdns.org/index.php?id=27
(instructions and more)

Best,
Robert
|
|
Kirk's 5 Year Mission Continues at:
Star Trek New Voyages
|
|


chennecke

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 122
    • View Profile
Re: xfree86
« Reply #2 on: 2010.02.16, 07:07:52 »
Have a look at my site at http://www.os2world.com/os2files/. Be warned though that XFree86/OS2 is outdated now. The latest available version is 4.5.0 and does not support current video adapters.

Alternatively, you could try using Hoblink X11 that comes with eCS. It's an X11 server that runs under PM and can even display X windows seemlessly. However, it's based on an older version of the X protocol and won't support some of the fancier font stuff of today, for instance.

cytan

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 213
    • View Profile
Re: xfree86
« Reply #3 on: 2010.02.16, 20:44:59 »
And it's one of those programmes which should be updated to OS/2.

This is another programme to be added to my essentials list (which includes JAVA btw)

cytan

Blonde Guy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 283
    • View Profile
    • Blonde Guy
Re: xfree86
« Reply #4 on: 2010.02.16, 23:52:37 »
I think HOBLink would be up to date if there was even a tiny demand for it.
If you can find 10 paying customers, it would be worth it to approach them.
Expert Consulting for OS/2 and eComStation

cytan

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 213
    • View Profile
Re: xfree86
« Reply #5 on: 2010.02.17, 00:05:03 »
I think HOBLink would be up to date if there was even a tiny demand for it.
If you can find 10 paying customers, it would be worth it to approach them.

Well, I'm willing to pay up to $100 for it. So 10 guys is only $1000. I have my doubts that HOBlink will be interested in updating their xserver for $1000.

cytan

Blonde Guy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 283
    • View Profile
    • Blonde Guy
Re: xfree86
« Reply #6 on: 2010.02.17, 00:20:50 »
I see they don't have X on any platform any more, which shouldn't surprise me.

I think they were $149, so make it $1490, and if X were still viable on any platform, then I would expect them to do it (because if 10 will offer to buy, there have got to be others who would, too.)

But that's because I thought they had it on other platforms, which would make it just a few days effort on OS/2. Plus, they were eCS supporters, so they didn't really need a strong business case.
Expert Consulting for OS/2 and eComStation

cytan

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 213
    • View Profile
Re: xfree86
« Reply #7 on: 2010.02.17, 03:28:17 »
I think the best bet is to port the latest version of XFree86 since it is open source. But who can do this?

cytan

abwillis

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 325
    • View Profile
Re: xfree86
« Reply #8 on: 2010.02.17, 04:25:48 »
I think the best bet is to port the latest version of XFree86 since it is open source. But who can do this?

cytan
I think it needs a newer compiler than EMX but unfortunately the use of sockets as it is used in xfree is a problem in the newer GCCs.  There was some work done on it... I think maybe by Dave Yeo? 

chennecke

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 122
    • View Profile
Re: xfree86
« Reply #9 on: 2010.02.17, 15:21:20 »
If anything at all one should look at X.org since XFree86 is pretty much dead. Dave has provided some libraries of X.org but didn't release a full X.org build -- probably because of the problems you mentioned.

cytan

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 213
    • View Profile
Re: xfree86
« Reply #10 on: 2010.02.17, 22:05:08 »
Perhaps somebody who's good at porting stuff or wanna try to port stuff should try to compile it since Paul has newly compiled gcc.

cytan




Saijin_Naib

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1357
  • Birdie Num-Nums
    • View Profile
    • Synperz Domain
Re: xfree86
« Reply #11 on: 2010.02.18, 02:37:17 »
So what would porting X.org mean for us? To run something, let's say Pidgin or Totem, would I have to have all the libs of a full Linux install somewhere on my harddrive? I'm not clear on how this works :(

abwillis

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 325
    • View Profile
Re: xfree86
« Reply #12 on: 2010.02.18, 03:05:28 »
So what would porting X.org mean for us? To run something, let's say Pidgin or Totem, would I have to have all the libs of a full Linux install somewhere on my harddrive? I'm not clear on how this works :(
You should be able to run Pidgin for instance but that assumes either that it is compiled against the Xorg/2 DLLs (and you have the necessary dependencies such as GTK2 that have been compiled for Xorg/2) or you'd have to have a Linux client that you then used the Xorg/2 server to connect to (on X the server and client are backwards to my normal thinking of client/server).  The problem with an app such as Pidgin is that because Xorg/2 runs as FullScreen you couldn't see it when you were in the WPS.  Assuming it is compiled against Xorg/2 then you should be able to run it on Hoblink to get it on the WPS.  If Xorg/2 is done the it would be especially nice to get Everblue completed.

cytan

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 213
    • View Profile
Re: xfree86
« Reply #13 on: 2010.02.18, 05:13:49 »
Ah the usual confusion about why it is called an Xserver rather than Xclient. The logic is actually correct: The drawing resources are on our PC, i.e. screen, colours etc. The remote programme running on a UNIX box (which is the client) requests painting resources on our local PC (i.e. a server giving resources) and so the naming is, in fact, correct. :)

Anyhow, the reason for having an up to date Xserver is so that we can connect to other boxes (usually UNIX) remotely and work with programmes which are only available on the UNIX boxes (like supercomputer programmes :-) ).

cytan