Subject: Linux-Misc Digest #584
From: Digestifier <Linux-Misc-Request@senator-bedfellow.MIT.EDU>
To: Linux-Misc@senator-bedfellow.MIT.EDU
Reply-To: Linux-Misc@senator-bedfellow.MIT.EDU
Date:     Wed, 10 Aug 94 12:13:18 EDT

Linux-Misc Digest #584, Volume #2                Wed, 10 Aug 94 12:13:18 EDT

Contents:
  [BUG] in cp (copy) on DOS fs. (Robert Logan)
  Re: PHIGS for Linux? (David A. Vohwinkel)
  Re: WABI vs. SoftWindows? (Larry Pyeatt)
  Re: ET4000/w32i?  How well supported? (Craig A. Lemon  VE3XCL)
  Re: [BUG] in cp (copy) on DOS fs. (Johan Myreen)
  Re: WABI vs. SoftWindows? (Craig S. Maloney)
  Re: lock tty program (Amit-Margalit)
  os distinctions (Raul Deluth Miller)
  Nexstep ON PPC/orange CARD (Laurent Debraux)
  Re: WABI vs. SoftWindows? (Mark A. Davis)
  Re: [BUG] in cp (copy) on DOS fs. (Robert Logan)
  Re: ET4000/w32i?  How well supported? (Larry Doolittle)
  Re: Usefulness of BSD/Linux Source Knowledge (was BSD vs. LINUX) (Brandon S. Allbery)
  New motherboard for Linux (Jeremy "TheBrez" Bresley)
  Re: WABI vs. SoftWindows? (Matthias Bruestle)
  Re: Free Motif GUI and API (clone) for Linux (Dave Hinz)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: rl@dmu.ac.uk (Robert Logan)
Subject: [BUG] in cp (copy) on DOS fs.
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 1994 12:24:07 GMT


Whoa - I appear to have found a major bug in Linux 'cp'.
Im on patchlevel 1.0.9 - Slackware 2.0 - with 3 Linux
partitions and 1 DOS partition.

Earlier this month I couldnt work out what had happened
when I backed up my Linux essentials to my DOS partition
in anticipation of an upgrade....

When one does a cp on a DOS partition incorrectly, data
can be lost with consumate ease, thus (Note the missing dot):

  cp /dosc/hold/xx.*

If you have 2 files, xx.aaa and xx.bbb, then xx.aaa will
overwrite xx.bbb - there is no error message about bad
syntax.

Needless to say - I lost over 10 megs of data. 

buyer beware.

bert
--
================================
Linux - too bloody good for you.
================================

------------------------------

Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.help
From: vohwi-d@acsu.buffalo.edu (David A. Vohwinkel)
Subject: Re: PHIGS for Linux?
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 1994 13:05:01 GMT

In article <CuBB7u.GD2@ccult1.comcons.nl>,
Hans de Hartog <dehartog@ccult1.comcons.nl> wrote:
>mjv@myhost.subdomain.domain (Michael Vinson) writes:
>
>>Is there an implementation of the PHIGS graphics standard available
>>for Linux? Does this question make any sense? (I've only heard about
>>PHIGS, never used it).
>
>>Thanks,
>>Michael Vinson
>
>I only know xgks which implements the GKS-standard. Or better: part of
>it because it only supports X-windows and meta-files as output-devices.
>It also has no GDP's. You can find it on sunsite.unc.edu
>-- 
> _____________________________________________________________________________
> Hans de Hartog, dehartog@comcons.nl, Voice: +31 348033100, Fax: +31 348033181
> Committed Consultancy BV, Korenmolenlaan 1b, 3447 GG Woerden, The Netherlands 

Are we talking about PEX? I just heard about it and am looking for info
myself! I see that in ftp.x.org:/R5contrib/PEXlib there is some stuff...
I haven't had time to look to far into it. 


        -Dave-



-- 
  David A Vohwinkel        
Unix Consulting   ^ ^     vohwi-d@acsu.buffalo.edu
  & Operations    0 0    @ The State University of New York at Buffalo   
==============oOO=(_)=OOo====================================================

------------------------------

Crossposted-To: comp.sys.hp,comp.sys.hp.apps,comp.sys.sun.apps,comp.windows.x,comp.windows.x.apps,comp.unix.unixware
From: pyeatt@CS.ColoState.EDU (Larry Pyeatt)
Subject: Re: WABI vs. SoftWindows?
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 1994 13:53:11 GMT

In article <32acqaINNs1@ringer.syd.dwt.csiro.au>,
Peter Wiley - Poultry <peter@prospect.anprod.csiro.au> wrote:
>
>As for the comment about event horizons, get real. Just *try* telling a 
>potential client that there's some software that will do what they want but
>all they have to do is wait a year, well maybe 18 months well....

Maybe that is why MS always promises to ship software at least 12 months
before they actually finish it.  Windows NT was really late and didn't
meet expectations, but a lot of people hung around waiting for it instead
of just buying an OS to get the job done.  What is the story with Chicago?

I agree that Linux is not quite ready for the big league, but I will
continue to run it at home.



-- 
Larry D. Pyeatt                   All standard disclaimers apply.
pyeatt@cs.colostate.edu           Void where prohibited.

------------------------------

From: calemon@sunee.uwaterloo.ca (Craig A. Lemon  VE3XCL)
Subject: Re: ET4000/w32i?  How well supported?
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 1994 13:36:07 GMT

In article <CuAF6p.Gq3@murdoch.acc.virginia.edu>,
Larry Doolittle <doolittle@cebaf.gov> wrote:
>Craig A. Lemon  VE3XCL (calemon@sunee.uwaterloo.ca) wrote:
>
>:      Also  : a while back I remember some threads about problems with 
>: the S3 Xfree.  Are there still problems and what is the nature of these 
>: problems?  I've got a friend with an S3 that would like to run Linux and
>: I wanted to be able to tell him what's going on...
>

>I would not consider buying any new hardware that
>was slower than this card or its bretheren - the
>best I have heard of the ET4000/stuff *UNDER LINUX*
>is half the performance of the slowest S3.   

OK.  It's good to have that comparison info.  I'm not shopping for the
ultimate...yet :-).  I can't afford the ultimate.  I'm looking for best 
compatibility because I don't have the money to say "well, if I find something
that doesn't work, try an S3".  Is the S3 slower or faster than the Mach32?
Basically I can get a decent ET4000W32i VLB for about CAN$130.  I can get a
true colour ATI VGA WONDER Mach32 for CAN$175-CAN$185.  I'm trying to decide.
I've used the ET4000 (no W32i) under Linux at work once and it was flawless,
although MUCH slower than the ATI GRaphics Ultra Pro on my workstation...
I know that the Mach32 X server works quite well, I know I didn't have any 
problems with a CAN$500 ATI Mach32 or a CAN$75 ET4000.  I want to know if
the W32i is providing anything special or any further problems over the ET4000.
I think I will price out S3's anyways since there's a lot of talk about them.

>I have seen ISA versions of the S3 boards advertised
>for as little as US$99, and a genuine STB VL-bus
>PowerGraph for as little as US$129.  Why use anything less?

        Unfortunately, things aren't quite as cheap up here.  But I see your
point.  Read my sig, though.  I'm a student :-(.  Then why am I buying a 
new computer at all?  For my education.  Why do I need it....  

        Sorry, got into a little self-justification fit :-)

>
>If you want more than 1024x768, you probably have sunk
>close to (or very much more than) US$1000 in your monitor,
>and presumably are not going to worry about $100 here
>or there on the video card.  The S3-928 boards are
>tried and true, support for the S3-864 boards sounds
>close enough to be useful, and the S3-964 boards should
>be close behind.  Read comp.windows.x.i386unix for
>an earful on this high end.

        Nope, I'm definitely not high end.  I have an NEC Multisync 3D that
I'll be attempting to keep my sanity with.  It would just be nice if when I
can afford something good, I don't need another card too.  I don't think any
of the cards I'm looking at are 1280x1024NI,  but that would be excellent, 
although not necessary at this point.

        Thanks for the advice on the S3.  Since the bugs are fixed, I might
check it out.  Where does it stand for speed in comparison to the Mach32?

>
>        - Larry Doolittle   doolittle@cebaf.gov


-- 
 Craig Lemon  VE3XCL (Advanced Class)  | Electrical Engineering
 calemon@sunee.uwaterloo.ca (school)   | University of Waterloo
 clemon@lemsys.UUCP (home)             | Ontario, CANADA
 ve3xcl@ve3euk.#swon.on.can.na  ve3xcl@at.ve3uow.ampr.org (Packet)

------------------------------

From: jem@snakemail.hut.fi (Johan Myreen)
Subject: Re: [BUG] in cp (copy) on DOS fs.
Date: 10 Aug 1994 14:37:53 GMT

In article <1994Aug10.122407.26071@dmu.ac.uk> rl@dmu.ac.uk (Robert Logan) writes:

>Whoa - I appear to have found a major bug in Linux 'cp'.
>Im on patchlevel 1.0.9 - Slackware 2.0 - with 3 Linux
>partitions and 1 DOS partition.

>When one does a cp on a DOS partition incorrectly, data
>can be lost with consumate ease, thus (Note the missing dot):

>  cp /dosc/hold/xx.*

>If you have 2 files, xx.aaa and xx.bbb, then xx.aaa will
>overwrite xx.bbb - there is no error message about bad
>syntax.

Hardly cp's fault, and it has got nothing to do with the DOS file
system.  The shell expands the pattern xx.* into "xx.aaa x.bbb" in
this case, and that's what cp sees.  There is no way for cp to know
the *.xx was *.xx and not xx.aaa and xx.bbb.  Cp (and every other Unix
program) was designed with this in mind.  You might want to try cp -i.

-- 
Johan Myreen
jem@vipunen.hut.fi
60 11' 55" N, 24 53' 30" E



------------------------------

From: craig@enterprise (Craig S. Maloney)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.hp,comp.sys.hp.apps,comp.sys.sun.apps,comp.windows.x,comp.windows.x.apps,comp.unix.unixware
Subject: Re: WABI vs. SoftWindows?
Date: 10 Aug 1994 13:46:01 GMT

(Stuff on Informix Deleted)

:>As for the comment about event horizons, get real. Just *try* telling a 
:>potential client that there's some software that will do what they want but
:>all they have to do is wait a year, well maybe 18 months well....

Hell, that's a throwback to the early days of MY computing career. 
Remember Atari? Remember Commodore?

:>That's one sale you'll *never* get. Enough of those and you're not in business.
:>Clients want solutions NOW, not next year. Look at the flak Novell gets about
:>bugs in Unixware.

Yes, but look how much MONEY people put into Unixware/Solaris. The only 
dimes I've thrown into Linux as of now are for release CD-ROM's. When 
people pay money for a product, the demand service when it doesn't work. 
Also, look at the turnaround for support on Linux. These people develop 
because they love Linux, and want to share. I don't think you could say 
the same about Solaris x86 or Novell.

:>If I can supply it now and know it works, it's a product. Otherwise, it's
:>vapourware. At the moment, WINE's vapourware.

True... but if working is criterion for working, then WABI is vapourware 
as well. :)

:>I've used Unixware running Windows and find it unsatisfactory. Ditto for 
:>Solaris X86 with WABI. I hope WINE does work well so I can ditch Windows off
:>my other machine and install Linux. Your making ignorant comments to people
:>who make their living trying to supply the best solutions now won't help
:>your cause.

I agree. I still have MeSsy-DOgs on my machine because I can't afford to 
loose the functionality that I already have on my machine. Linux is not a 
solution right now. Face it, Linux isn't going to blow MS-DOS out of the 
water- yet. However, I see Linux growing in leaps and bounds over the 
next few years. At that time, some people will have to do some serious 
soul searching on whether MS-DOS/WIN4/OS2/Unixware/Solaris/Linux will be 
their OS.

:>Peter Wiley :>Database R & D, Animal Genetics


Craig
=============================================================================
Craig Maloney                             | Engineering Computer Center
Supervisor                                | Wayne State University
PC/Mac Systems, College of Engineering    | 5050 Anthony Wayne Drive
  Internet: craig@enterprise.eng.wayne.edu| Detroit, MI 48202
                                          |  "Eat Drum, Eat Drum, EAT DRUM!"
                                          |                      -Animal
=============================================================================

------------------------------

From: amitm@doronx.iso.dec.com (Amit-Margalit)
Subject: Re: lock tty program
Date: 10 Aug 1994 14:15:53 GMT
Reply-To: amit@tavis.enet.dec.com


--
Hi!

Any POSIX book will do since Linux in POSIX compliant. Basically, you need to
take a dive into "termios"...

                        Amit.
=============================================================================
Amit Margalit (Software Support - Digital Israel)    And also a Linux addict!
InterNet: amit@tavis.enet.dec.com "I prefer hard cash! If you can't scratch a
window with it, I don't accept it." -- Rooster (The HitchHiker's Guide)
=============================================================================

------------------------------

From: rockwell@nova.umd.edu (Raul Deluth Miller)
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.advocacy,comp.unix.questions,comp.unix.solaris,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: os distinctions
Date: 10 Aug 1994 10:43:58 -0400

It looks like I might have to start using Word and Excel before the
WINE project is completed.  I've no actual production requirement for
either of these applications, but that may change at some point in the
future...

As a result I need to pick an operating environment that has a windows
emulation capability sufficient to run these two applications, but
which doesn't cripple me for normal work.  Normal work for me is
development on a variety of remote machines -- I do mainframe
development (mostly apl under vm/cms hpo), and I'm migrating data and
such to other machines (at the moment, that means oracle under solaris
on a sparc).  I rely heavily on linux and gnu emacs to manage multiple
communication links with multiple systems.

At first glance, my preference would be to migrate to solaris --
there's decent windows emulation in place, and most of the rest of the
facilities should work pretty much the same as under linux.  However,
I may need to either use some other system, or provide reasons to not
use such a system.  Money is an issue here, but it's not the big
issue.  If I'm lucky, I'll get my machine upgraded (currently, it's
barely above "capable of running terminal emulation software" level)
and participate in WINE development instead of having to migrate...

Can people who are familiar with multiple systems give me contrasting
examples that might serve to distinguish my choices?

Also, I'm interested in some discussion of the windows emulators -- at
this point windows emulation is just a checkoff item, but that's
subject to change.  I'm looking for low-system-impact at the moment,
and don't really know what that's going to mean over the next year or
so.

Followups have been directed to only advocacy newsgroups.  I'm hoping
to follow this thread in comp.unix.advocacy -- if you direct your
responses away from that group, could you inform me of this decision?

Raul D. Miller             n =: p*q               NB. prime p, q, e
<rockwell@nova.umd.edu>                           NB. public e, n, y
                           y =: n&|&(*&x)^:e 1
                           x -: n&|&(*&y)^:d 1    NB. 1 < (d*e) +.&<: (p,q)

------------------------------

From: ldebraux@hds.univ-compiegne.fr (Laurent Debraux)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.powerpc,comp.soft-sys.nextstep,comp.sys.next.misc
Subject: Nexstep ON PPC/orange CARD
Date: 10 Aug 1994 14:44:50 GMT
Reply-To: ldebraux@hds.univ-compiegne.fr


 For what i know, at this time it's not possible to use NEXTSTEP
 on PPC, but who knows if it is possible, if we use an ORANGE CARD ?
 And is it possible to use LINUX with such a card

 Answer me directly by email Thanks 



------------------------------

Crossposted-To: comp.sys.hp,comp.sys.hp.apps,comp.sys.sun.apps,comp.windows.x,comp.windows.x.apps,comp.unix.unixware
From: mark@taylor.infi.net (Mark A. Davis)
Subject: Re: WABI vs. SoftWindows?
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 1994 13:14:14 GMT

>> >I admit I have no experience with Unixware - send me a copy and I
>> >try and review it in the magazine I am writing for.
>> Buy it yourself!  It's only $166 from Information Foundation.

>Why should someone buy "the" Unix for $166 if he has "a" Unix, that
>is about (maybe more or less) as good for him and is free?

He shouldn't, unless he is interested in features which Unixware has and
Linux does not.  Let's stop being so naive sometimes people....

>> But when one starts considering platforms upon which to base a
>> commercial product, Linux simply falls far short.  The lack of Windows

>With the iBCS2-Emu run:
> Informix SQL Standard Engine, Oracle, Tactician Plus, Uniplex,
> Uniplex Windows, VSIxFAX, ViaCrypt PGP, Word Perfect 5.1,
> MicroFocus COBOL/2 v1.3, Uniface v5.1 and many more

>And commercial soft FOR Linux:
> Motif (ca.200$), FinSim (10k-17k $), Prochem-C (10k-30k $), MinD (for Linux
> ca. 700$, for other Unices 1400$), Perl90 (Werum GmbH, commercial?),
> ROSIN (10k$), Poet 2.1 (Personal Ed.:99$, Professional Ed.:2500$)
> and probably many more

That is a *****VERY SMALL FRACTION****** of what is available AND supported
for Unixware and SCO.  When you are talking a business, it is not a game.  
Come ON people....  Linux is wonderful and great and super and other
superlatives.  This does NOT mean it is suitable for use everywhere.  There
is NO WAY Linux, for example, could run our Hospital the way SCO does now.  It
does not have multiprocessing support, multithreads, multidrop support,
it won't run 3/4 of the software we have to use, it does not support some
of the special hardware we use.
-- 
  /--------------------------------------------------------------------------\
  | Mark A. Davis    | Lake Taylor Hospital | Norfolk, VA (804)-461-5001x431 |
  | Sys.Administrator|  Computer Services   | mark@taylor.infi.net           |
  \--------------------------------------------------------------------------/

------------------------------

From: rl@dmu.ac.uk (Robert Logan)
Subject: Re: [BUG] in cp (copy) on DOS fs.
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 1994 14:15:51 GMT

Robert Logan (rl@dmu.ac.uk) wrote:

: When one does a cp on a DOS partition incorrectly, data
: can be lost with consumate ease, thus (Note the missing dot):
:   cp /dosc/hold/xx.*
: If you have 2 files, xx.aaa and xx.bbb, then xx.aaa will
: overwrite xx.bbb - there is no error message about bad
: syntax.

Flame proof undies singed badly... This aint a bug (good)
but its a painful feature of unix which might sting many
a DOS to Unix convert in the next few Linux years..

Ive been using Unix for over 10 years and have NEVER seen
this happen to me. Up until now I have always put a specific
destination into my 'cp's - shell wildcard expansion hasnt
played its part. I had assumed that cp would always require
a destination ... one small typo and bang went lots of stuff.

As a WARNING to other less wary unix users - cp gets wildcards
expanded 'into' it - same as everything else. As a happy Linux
user, this is one more thing which I can see might deter DOS
and Micropiss converts from getting sense.

Thanks for the useful replies all you nice folks :)

bert
================================
Linux - too bloody good for you.
================================

------------------------------

From: doolitt@recycle.cebaf.gov (Larry Doolittle)
Subject: Re: ET4000/w32i?  How well supported?
Reply-To: doolittle@cebaf.gov
Date: Tue, 9 Aug 1994 21:47:13 GMT

Craig A. Lemon  VE3XCL (calemon@sunee.uwaterloo.ca) wrote:

:       Also  : a while back I remember some threads about problems with 
: the S3 Xfree.  Are there still problems and what is the nature of these 
: problems?  I've got a friend with an S3 that would like to run Linux and
: I wanted to be able to tell him what's going on...

For the record: I have been running an S3 card
(STB PowerGraph VL-24) for about 15 months now,
under nothing but Linux/XFree (well .. the first
three months were with the 'beta' XS3-0.4 server).
I have seen nothing but superb performance at
1024x768.

I would not consider buying any new hardware that
was slower than this card or its bretheren - the
best I have heard of the ET4000/stuff *UNDER LINUX*
is half the performance of the slowest S3.   

I have seen ISA versions of the S3 boards advertised
for as little as US$99, and a genuine STB VL-bus
PowerGraph for as little as US$129.  Why use anything less?

If you want more than 1024x768, you probably have sunk
close to (or very much more than) US$1000 in your monitor,
and presumably are not going to worry about $100 here
or there on the video card.  The S3-928 boards are
tried and true, support for the S3-864 boards sounds
close enough to be useful, and the S3-964 boards should
be close behind.  Read comp.windows.x.i386unix for
an earful on this high end.

        - Larry Doolittle   doolittle@cebaf.gov

------------------------------

Crossposted-To: comp.os.386bsd.misc
From: bsa@kf8nh.wariat.org (Brandon S. Allbery)
Subject: Re: Usefulness of BSD/Linux Source Knowledge (was BSD vs. LINUX)
Date: Tue, 9 Aug 1994 22:15:32 GMT

In article <CuA7D6.H43@pell.com>, orc@pell.com (Orc) says:
+---------------
|    david parsons \bi/ And doesn't the M in MCI mean microwave?
+------------->8

They used to go by the name "Microwave Communications, Inc.".

++Brandon
-- 
Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH         [44.70.4.88]             bsa@kf8nh.wariat.org
Linux development:  iBCS2, JNOS, MH

------------------------------

From: brez@agora.rdrop.com (Jeremy "TheBrez" Bresley)
Subject: New motherboard for Linux
Date: Tue, 9 Aug 1994 22:42:46 GMT

I am looking to buy a new motherboard, and wanted to get suggestions for
any that are known to work well or that don't work right with Linux.  I
have already read the Hardware-HOWTO and am interested in hearing about
personal experiences with certain companies, chipsets, vendors, etc.  I
am looking at either a DX/33 or DX2/66 system, (depending on how good of a
deal I'm offered! :-) See article in misc.forsale.computers.pc-clone or
misc.forsale.wanted for specifics).  Thanks in advance for any info.

(I already know to avoid Uni chipsets.  :-(  I found out mine doesn't
support 4MB SIMMs like the manual says.  After I got my 16 megs worth.
:-( )


Jeremy "TheBrez" Bresley
brez@agora.rdrop.com
Jeremy.Bresley@launchpad.unc.edu
TheBrez on IRC


------------------------------

Crossposted-To: comp.sys.hp,comp.sys.hp.apps,comp.sys.sun.apps,comp.windows.x,comp.windows.x.apps,comp.unix.unixware
From: m@mbsks.franken.de (Matthias Bruestle)
Subject: Re: WABI vs. SoftWindows?
Date: Mon, 8 Aug 1994 21:31:33 GMT

=====BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE=====

Mahlzeit



> >I admit I have no experience with Unixware - send me a copy and I
> >try and review it in the magazine I am writing for.
> Buy it yourself!  It's only $166 from Information Foundation.
Why should someone buy "the" Unix for $166 if he has "a" Unix, that
is about (maybe more or less) as good for him and is free?

> I've gotten several emails already, demanding that I buy copies of
> UnixWare for Linuxers.  "If you think it's so great, why don't you buy
> me a copy?"  That response didn't do much to change my basic
> perception that the Linuxoids don't have a very sound understanding of
> the free market system.
They are idealistic, and whats wrong with that?

> There are people of equal enthusiasm and creativity providing
> competitive products on Microsoft OS platforms.  Enthusiasm and
People who fight for their land fight better than mercenaries.

> creativity are not enough; one needs a market advantage as well.  I
> contend that Linux will never provide this advantage.
Perhaps, perhaps not.

> What Linux _does_ provide, on the other hand, is an easy route for
> interested users to become introduced to UNIX.  I received one email
I agree.

> But when one starts considering platforms upon which to base a
> commercial product, Linux simply falls far short.  The lack of Windows
With the iBCS2-Emu run:
 Informix SQL Standard Engine, Oracle, Tactician Plus, Uniplex,
 Uniplex Windows, VSIxFAX, ViaCrypt PGP, Word Perfect 5.1,
 MicroFocus COBOL/2 v1.3, Uniface v5.1 and many more
And commercial soft FOR Linux:
 Motif (ca.200$), FinSim (10k-17k $), Prochem-C (10k-30k $), MinD (for Linux
 ca. 700$, for other Unices 1400$), Perl90 (Werum GmbH, commercial?),
 ROSIN (10k$), Poet 2.1 (Personal Ed.:99$, Professional Ed.:2500$)
 and probably many more

> support alone is a killer - Windows programs can be _extremely_ useful
> as front-ends to UNIX apps on a platform which can support them.  I've
> been admonished by many Linuxoids "they've only just started working
> on WINE - give them time!"  What the hell - I'm going to tell my
> customers that?  Get real!
If you customers need now WINE, they can't use Linux. But what is in
one year, in two years? Who knows.




                                Mahlzeit



=====BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE=====
Version: 2.6ui @mbsks.franken.de

iQCVAgUBLkakDZu/Id7cuNAPAQEDXAP/XgqRGO6pE2VCIbAfgpF2pWABu1AyB0iq
LZognGpuGHKocqv84fzgM2yNl/INWMdG5rr9NDWN2/mcu3BPIJo09v/JcV1hQCil
VprqtdF4s7P77h6MOUDox/Tx0btteFdLtQUcLXt2nt2qB9kdT+RVIKqZkem1FYm1
3oV1ZldhZNs=
=mL6L
=====END PGP SIGNATURE=====
-- 
Life is hard, but it's harder if you have too many scruples.

------------------------------

Crossposted-To: comp.windows.x.motif
From: daveh@texlin.minmet.mcgill.ca (Dave Hinz)
Subject: Re: Free Motif GUI and API (clone) for Linux
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 1994 13:56:40 GMT

Jon Fo wrote:

: : : My aim is to have a Motif look-and-feel environment. And after a few
: : : weeks I would like to try developing apps to the Motif API. Is it
: : : possible to achieve these goals free?
: : : --
: : : Juhani Jaakola, jaakola@cc.helsinki.fi

: : Try getting fvwm.  It has a "Motif" look-and-feel mode.  It's not mwm,
: : and some say it's better.  There are some important differences, but I
: : use it as my main window manager.  It's based on twm more or less.  I 

: As usual, I only answered half the question.  No excuses this time, since
: I answered from home.  Thanks to Jason Van Patten for pointing this out to 

Summary:  fvwm is only a window manager, not a widget set for development.

: me.  As for the second part of the question, I think OI would certainly be 
: the way to go _if it is freely available_.  OI allows you to develop user 
: interface code that can be both Open Look and OSF/Motif compliant, at least 
: in look-and-feel.  I believe you can select between the two at runtime.  

OI is a nice piece of publicly available software, but is has many of the
same weaknesses that OPENLOOK XView has--the industry does not widely
support it.  Good toolkits are timeconsuming to become proficient with
and noone wants to spend their energy on a dead end.

: There IS another solution, but it is quite different from the classic 
: toolkit approach.  It's the tcl/tk toolkit.  You define your user 
: interface as a script and link in the interpreter into your program.

My question:  what widget set is used by tcl/tk?  I know that there is
a Motif wrapper in the works but without it what do the apps look like?
Are they just the Athena widgets--are they nice in appearance like Motif?

Of course their has been recent discussion of a Motif clone well under
development by now.  But SUN and HP and DEC have approved the COSE
variation of Motif now--supposedly there will now be 2 button mouse
operations on the text widgets, standardized Xterm, etc.  Until all
this mess gets cleared up we will probably be better off learning to
program Win32!  :( 

: Jon Fo
: jkf@shell.portal.com

I can only conclude that there is no  Motif clone currently available
( hopefully that will change soon) and that things are still a bit 
unstable industry-wise.  Goodluck.


------------------------------


** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **

The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:

    Internet: Linux-Misc-Request@NEWS-DIGESTS.MIT.EDU

You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.misc) via:

    Internet: Linux-Misc@NEWS-DIGESTS.MIT.EDU

Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
    nic.funet.fi				pub/OS/Linux
    tsx-11.mit.edu				pub/linux
    sunsite.unc.edu				pub/Linux

End of Linux-Misc Digest
******************************
