[snip]
Of course "unfortunately" the window-maker port is currently "broken" so
it is hard
To do further "experiments"
Don't know about test builds, but with the latest build WindowMaker
works correctly: I use it every day in rootless mode for my job with my
Win2K machine.
Ciao,
Danilo Tur
BTW, you have to add to the top of startxwin.bat the line
set HOME=XXX where XXX is your home directory,
otherwise wmaker is trying to use the variable HOME from windows environment
c:\Documents and settings\... which does not work.
"Yadin Y Goldschmidt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
avl7kv$
I have Window Maker working fine with the recent built. (including rootless)
I don't know what stephen is refering to.
Yadin.
"Harold L Hunt II" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Stephen,
>
> Kensuke Matsuzaki is working on the Windows-based window
Stephen,
What was that all about?
We are working on a Windows-based window manager. Need I say that again?
If Window Maker is broken, then use one of twm, mwm (lesstif package),
openbox, etc.
Harold
Bovy, Stephen wrote:
FYI
I have been experimenting with "exceed" window manager and "cygwi
FYI
I have been experimenting with "exceed" window manager and "cygwin"
Integration/synergy.
It is "interesting" to note that I can execute the "windowmaker"
cygwin-port and get it
To work natively with the "exceed" X-window server. The clip , the dock
, ect all
Pop-up as "icons" on my windows
Stephen,
Kensuke Matsuzaki is working on the Windows-based window manager.
If Window Maker is broke, then someone else is gonna have to fix it. I
released a few packages with the intention that others would take them
over, but no one has. So, if Window Maker is broke, then I will have to
pul
lto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
Behalf Of Harold L Hunt II
Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2002 5:55 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Rootless mode
Looking at Kensuke's code, he uses an internal queue to store messages that
need to be processed by child windows. For some reason this queue is not
sages, causing
Windows to send them again.
Harold
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Jean-Claude Gervais
Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2002 1:52 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Rootless mode
This may be obvious, but the difference between th
I was able to reproduce the -multiwindow moving bug on two Win2k
machines, and "Show window contents while dragging"
does not seem to have any effect on those machines.
(I already had it switched off)
Neither does disabling ActiveDesktop help.
Harold L Hunt II wrote:
David,
I have not released a test version because the version that Kensuke
sent me didn't work at all. It just kept repeating the dragging of a
window if you ever moved one. I sent a report to the list but he
never responded. I didn't want to bug him about it for aw
er 12, 2002 1:33 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Rootless mode
Kensuke,
Hmm... that sounds about right. Windows 2000 and Windows XP have that
option
on by default, I believe.
Are you going to try to debug this?
Harold
Matsuzaki Kensuke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Harold,
&
Kensuke,
Hmm... that sounds about right. Windows 2000 and Windows XP have that option
on by default, I believe.
Are you going to try to debug this?
Harold
Matsuzaki Kensuke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Harold,
>
> I could not reproduce that bug, but now I found that this bug occur when
> "Sh
Harold,
I could not reproduce that bug, but now I found that this bug occur when
"Show window contents while dragging" enabled.
Maximizing a window never stop too.
Matsuzaki Kensuke
* Harold L Hunt II <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-12-12 11:24:25 -0500]:
> Please do not release your own test version. As I said, I am waiting
> for the repeating window movement to be looked into and possibly fixed.
> I do not wish to get lots of duplicate bug reports for such an obvious
> bug.
On Thu, 12 Dec 2002 11:22:45 -0500, Harold L Hunt II <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
David,
I have not released a test version because the version that Kensuke sent me
didn't work at all. It just kept repeating the dragging of a window if
you ever moved one. I sent a report to the list but he nev
Please do not release your own test version. As I said, I am waiting
for the repeating window movement to be looked into and possibly fixed.
I do not wish to get lots of duplicate bug reports for such an obvious
bug. If Kensuke says it doesn't happen with his version, then I will
rebuild min
David,
I have not released a test version because the version that Kensuke sent
me didn't work at all. It just kept repeating the dragging of a window
if you ever moved one. I sent a report to the list but he never
responded. I didn't want to bug him about it for awhile in case he had
seen
Kensuke,
Did you ever look into the bug I reported where a dragged window just
keeps on repeating the dragging and never stops moving? Seems to be a
problem with the message queue not being cleared properly.
My email is in the list archives if you missed it.
Harold
Kensuke Matsuzaki wrote:
-multiwindow is not stable, so I thought binary is not needed.
XWin.exe is here.
http://peppermint.jp/products/asis/XWin.2002_12_09.exe.bz2
And libfreetype 2.1.1 is here.
http://peppermint.jp/temp/libfreetype.tar.bz2
Kensuke Matsuzaki
* Kensuke Matsuzaki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-12-12 21:10:54 +0900]:
> To build XWin.exe, please read
>http://xfree86.cygwin.com/docs/cg/cygwin-xfree-cg.html
I should have figured that out without being told, sorry. I'm now
getting the source via CVS. There sure is a lot of it; I hope x86 is
> I wholeheartedly second that; either a test build, or perhaps some
> instructions on how to take the patch(es) you supplied and build a
> modified version using the existing Cygwin tools.
To build XWin.exe, please read http://xfree86.cygwin.com/docs/cg/cygwin-xfree-cg.html
The patch can be
* David Fraser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-12-12 10:03:53 +0200]:
> Kensuke, Harold,
> I was just wondering whether it would be possible to create a test build
> of the X server with this multi-window
> mode. Obviously there are issues with it but I presume they only come up
> in multi-window mode?
Kensuke, Harold,
I was just wondering whether it would be possible to create a test build
of the X server with this multi-window
mode. Obviously there are issues with it but I presume they only come up
in multi-window mode?
It would just be really nice to see it beginning to work - this is
somet
JS,
Kensuke titled his message ``rootless mode'' when it should really have
been titled ``multi-window mode''. The goal of multi-window mode is to
create a Windows-window for each top-level X Window, rather than
creating one huge window for your entire X desktop.
Harold
J S wrote:
Kensuk
Kensuke,
The new patch is an architectual improvement.
However, when I run it, if I move a window it gets moved, then it jumps
back to its original position and retraces the move path that I took it on,
over and over again until I feel like I will throw up. :)
I am not sure what is causing
Kensuke,
The new patch is an architectual improvement.
However, when I run it, if I move a window it gets moved, then it jumps
back to its original position and retraces the move path that I took it
on, over and over again until I feel like I will throw up. :)
I am not sure what is causing th
Kensuke,
Excellent. I will try to take a look at this patch tonight. I was hoping that
the window manager would eventually be integrated into XWin.exe and I am
interested in seeing how you did this.
Thanks for your great patches.
By the way, was your new patch a diff against the original CVS t
Harold,
It remains only for debugging.
> Am I correct that the root window is still being drawn, even thought it is
> not really usable? Is that something that remains to be fixed, or did I
> have something go wrong with my patching?
By the way, this is new patch that integrates XWin and the wi
Kensuke,
Very interesting patch. I have compiled a version of the multiwindow
executable and checked it out.
Am I correct that the root window is still being drawn, even thought it is
not really usable? Is that something that remains to be fixed, or did I
have something go wrong with my patchin
Harold,
Sorry, I forgot to think about end-of-line character.
> Just a quick question: does the window manager have to be started
> seperately from XWin.exe, or does XWin.exe take care of launching the
> nwindow manager when you specify -multiwindow ?
It need to be started separately. So
$XWin
Kensuke,
Wow, you have been busy.
Could you run Cygwin's ``d2u'' on winwindow.h to convert the DOS
end-of-line characters to UNIX end-of-line characters and run the patch
again?
Just a quick question: does the window manager have to be started
seperately from XWin.exe, or does XWin.exe take c
So how was it that you start rootless mode again?
Just kidding.
I guess I should have mentioned that I was about to go on
vacation for over a week after I sent my last message.
My impression of XOpenWin was that it was going to replace
the low-level graphic calls from Windows with calls to X.
Am
Stephen,
Use the ``-rootless'' command line parameter for XWin.exe.
Harold
Bovy, Stephen wrote:
I would like to try the new rootless mode, but I cant find any
Info on how to use it ...
Any suggestions ???
OK. Whose turn is it to chastise this?
RTFMLA!
At 12:56 2002-11-11, Bovy, Stephen wrote:
I would like to try the new rootless mode, but I cant find any
Info on how to use it ...
Any suggestions ???
dnesday, November 06, 2002 10:13 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Rootless mode with Query mode
Jean-Claude Gervais wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> If I start XWin with the following parameters, :0 -rootless -query
hostname
>
> I get the Redhat login dialog
Jean-Claude Gervais wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> If I start XWin with the following parameters, :0 -rootless -query hostname
>
> I get the Redhat login dialog box, which appears with NO background.
>
> This is good.
>
> Then when I log in, whether I select GNOME or KDE, t
AIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Thomas Chadwick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Harold L Hunt II"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: rootless mode and mousing to other windows
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 10:51:54 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: from alageremail2
Wilhelm,
Oh yeah, I see your point. I don''t want to start up that discussion
again :)
Harold
Wilhelm Person wrote:
Right now I use cygwin xfree for terminal emulation, more or less. But it
would be nice to be able to use an X windowmanager instead of Explorer. So
all the applications, even
Right now I use cygwin xfree for terminal emulation, more or less. But it
would be nice to be able to use an X windowmanager instead of Explorer. So
all the applications, even stuff like IE or WinAMP, are managed through
the X window manager.
As I understand it the current efforts with a rootless
Wilhelm,
Wilhelm Person wrote:
Guess I'm in the 1% then, I prefer fvwm to any other window manager I have
seen yet. It would be very, very cool to have fvwm on Windows.
/W
Are you referring to just having fvwm available for Cygwin/XFree86 or
are you referring to having the additional featu
Harold L Hunt II wrote:
Well, that is not an opinion that I have ever seen expressed here to
date and I have not seen any developer announce that they are aiming to
provide such functionality. It has always been my understanding that
99% of people are interested in having MS Windows manage the
Guess I'm in the 1% then, I prefer fvwm to any other window manager I have
seen yet. It would be very, very cool to have fvwm on Windows.
/W
On Fri, 1 Nov 2002, Harold L Hunt II wrote:
> Gerald S. Williams wrote:
>
> >Ultimately, what you really want is the ability to go both
> >ways--let X ap
Gerald S. Williams wrote:
Ultimately, what you really want is the ability to go both
ways--let X applications be managed by Windows and let
Windows applications be managed by X window managers (like
LiteStep only allowing X calls all the way down--I think
LiteStep uses GTK or something). Of cours
Thomas Chadwick wrote:
> Is it as simple as patching XWin to call XSetInputFocus() with a focus
> argument of "None" when MS Windows informs it that it has lost focus?
That's the type of thing I was hoping for.
Harold L Hunt II wrote:
> I don't think that such interaction between the X Windows
Hi,
From: "Gerald S. Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 13:28:04 -0500
::I agree -rootless rocks. And a -systray option would be great.
It's rocking realy cool! :-)
::But one thing that I'd really like to be able to do now that
::-rootless is around is be able to have all X win
I don't think that such interaction between the X Windows window manager
and, essentially, the Windows window manager is going to be useful in
the end, and it would be overly complicated to implement such an interim
solution.
Remember that the ultimate solution is to write calls that make Windo
Is it as simple as patching XWin to call XSetInputFocus() with a focus
argument of "None" when MS Windows informs it that it has lost focus?
From: "Gerald S. Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: rootless mode and mousing to other windows
Date:
Harold L Hunt II wrote:
Yes, we should look into doing something that would allow rootless-mode
windows to be placed anywhere on the virtual display area. I think that
may only require setting the size of the fake Windows-window to the size
of the virtual display region. Should be easy, right?
Problems solved!
The first was my bad (told nView not to let apps span two screens when
maximizing, do'h!).
'-engine 1' took care of the redraw problem, which appeared with
rootless as well.
/Marcus
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Try it with the ``-engine 1'' parameter and report your results.
--Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:cygwin-xfree-owner@;cygwin.com] On Behalf Of
> Jean-Claude Gervais
> Sent: den 20 oktober 2002 21:54
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Rootless mode only works on one monitor
>
>
> Marcus,
>
>
Yes, we should look into doing something that would allow rootless-mode
windows to be placed anywhere on the virtual display area. I think that
may only require setting the size of the fake Windows-window to the size
of the virtual display region. Should be easy, right? ;)
Harold
Jehan wrote
Marcus,
Try it with the ``-engine 1'' parameter and report your results.
Harold
Marcus Lindblom wrote:
Hi!
Am running Cygwin and Test67 of XWin.exe, a GF4 Ti4200 and a
nView-enhanced desktop (which windows sees as one monitor at 2560x1024,
not as two 1280x1024).
Rootless mode is really cool,
4:32 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Rootless mode only works on one monitor
I sort of did that, didn't I? ;)
Note that I am running both monitors from the same graphics adapter, and
use driver software to link them together as one big screen. I haven't
tested using the WinXP-multim
Marcus,
Could you post the details of how you get multiple-monitors to work with X?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:cygwin-xfree-owner@;cygwin.com]On
Behalf Of Marcus Lindblom
Sent: Sunday, October 20, 2002 3:08 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Rootless
Marcus Lindblom wrote:
Problems solved!
The first was my bad (told nView not to let apps span two screens when
maximizing, do'h!).
By default, XWin open a window as big as the primary desktop. Setting
nView to use both monitors as one big desktop is one solution.
But you can also have two des
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> It was posted on the 15th of this month in this thread.
And I received it. Must have been blind that day.
bye
ago
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.gotti.org ICQ: 126018723
Don't worry, the patch came through correctly. The problem was that the
email did not clearly state that a rootless mode had been implemented,
so both Alexander and I didn't pay any attention to it. I didn't even
notice that it had a patch attached.
The message is in the archives:
http://cygw
Harold L Hunt II wrote:
So, rootless mode makes Cygwin/XFree86 actually useful for the primary
maintainer to get some work done! This is astonishing! :)
So hopefully that will give you some incentive to finish the rootless
mode sooner then... Ouch, no, no beating, I was just kidding. ;)
Je
Yikes!!! I just noticed that my XWin.log is 52 MB for my one hour
session in Cygwin/XFree86. I will have to roll a new release tonight
that turns off the logging of the winAddRgn messages. Sorry about that.
Harold
root wrote:
Works fine..no rubber bands.. none of my previous
problems (my er
Works fine..no rubber bands.. none of my previous
problems (my error!).
Only quirk I can see is loads of 'winAddRgn()' message lines at the end of
my XWin.log.
Thanks a million..I owe someone a beer for this!!
Colin
FYI - I've taken down the binary I posted to avoid any confusion with
Harold's test release of XWin -rootless.
>From: "Thomas Chadwick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: Rootless mode revisited...
>Da
What is that?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
Behalf Of Keith D. Tyler
This could be a nifty option while I hold my breath for win32-x11. :)
> However, I noticed a few strange artifacts of this approach to rootless
> mode...
>
> 2) Now that there is no root window, you can't use the XWindows window
> manager's root-window menus.
Unless you turn off -nodecoration, then the root window is available as an
ugly strip above your X apps.
>From: MATSUZAKI Kensuke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: "Thomas Chadwick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: Rootless mode revisited...
>Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2002 02:08:41 +0900
[snip]
> > 3) A favorite tool of mine, x2x, is broken, whic
MATSUZAKI Kensuke wrote:
>>1) When you click and drag on an Xwindow to move it, you only see the bits
>>and pieces of the "rubber band" outline which happen to overlap the other
>>Xwindows. Where the rubber band overlaps Windows windows, you see nothing.
>
>
> It seems that outline is drawn o
> 1) When you click and drag on an Xwindow to move it, you only see the bits
> and pieces of the "rubber band" outline which happen to overlap the other
> Xwindows. Where the rubber band overlaps Windows windows, you see nothing.
It seems that outline is drawn on Root window and this patch cr
That's brilliant.
Works well on W2K serving a remote Linux. Problems with applications that spawn extra
child windows, help, abouts etc, being confined to the top left of the parent window.
I ssh tunelled stuff like ethereal with no other problems. Spotted the 'ghost' rubber
banding on movemen
;To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: Rootless mode revisited...
>Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2002 10:21:25 -0400
>
>I tried out this patch (took a few days because I needed to get xfree86 out
>of CVS and build it). Very cool. Thanks a bunch to MATSUZAKI for coding
On Wed, 16 Oct 2002, Harold L Hunt II wrote:
> Oh my god, I completely missed this patch! Wow!
I can't remember this patch too. Either it got lost or was somehow
rejected by the mailserver or maybe was sent to a private address.
bye
ago
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.gotti.org
; to me. I had every intention of developing and experimenting with
> such a patch myself. He just beat me to it.
>
>> From: Harold L Hunt II <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Subject: Re: Rootless mode revisited...
&g
Oh my god, I completely missed this patch! Wow!
I can't wait to take a look at it tonight!
Harold
MATSUZAKI Kensuke wrote:
>Thomas didn't talk about X Shape Extension.
>I think Thomas's idea is something like this.
>
>With this patch and "-nodecoration" option, it seems to work good.
>
>
>
patch came as a complete surprise to me.
I had every intention of developing and experimenting with such a patch
myself. He just beat me to it.
>From: Harold L Hunt II <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: Rootless mode revisited...
yone wants to try it out, here's a binary that I built
> last night from source I pulled from CVS yesterday...
>
> http://home.adelphia.net/~tlcweb/cygwin/XWin.exe
>
>
>> From: MATSUZAKI Kensuke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTE
uilt last
night from source I pulled from CVS yesterday...
http://home.adelphia.net/~tlcweb/cygwin/XWin.exe
>From: MATSUZAKI Kensuke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: Rootless mode revisited...
>Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2002
Thomas didn't talk about X Shape Extension.
I think Thomas's idea is something like this.
With this patch and "-nodecoration" option, it seems to work good.
pseudo-rootless.patch
Description: Binary data
In a cursory look at the Darwin project, it seemed that they were shadowing
every top-level (child of root) window with a pixmap / hbitmap / dibsection.
The action would be something like draw into the dibsections memory with X
windows drawing routines and then use DirectDraw's fastblt to push it
Let me sum it up like this: we already know how to do it. That isn't
the problem. The problem is that requires lot of work to implement the
design that we have in mind.
What Thomas suggested is an interesting idea. His idea was obviously a
suggestion and it probably wasn't thought out from
Thomas Chadwick wrote:
> I just had a thought on how to implement rootless mode and I'm hoping
> someone more familiar with Windows programming and/or the XWin server
> might let me know if it's a dead-end before I spend too much time
> researching it further.
>
> The idea I had is this: Can
Harold L Hunt II wrote:
> Good point Alexander.
>
> On a side note: Why is it that XDarwin has so many people contributing
> code and features (they seem to have an OpenGL-passthrough system now,
> which is pretty amazing), while Cygwin/XFree86 has so few
> contributors? This seems contradict
Harold L Hunt II wrote:
> Good point Alexander.
>
> On a side note: Why is it that XDarwin has so many people contributing
> code and features (they seem to have an OpenGL-passthrough system now,
> which is pretty amazing), while Cygwin/XFree86 has so few contributors?
> This seems contradi
On Fri, Sep 27, 2002 at 03:36:00PM -0400, Harold L Hunt II wrote:
>Good point Alexander.
>
>On a side note: Why is it that XDarwin has so many people contributing
>code and features (they seem to have an OpenGL-passthrough system now,
>which is pretty amazing), while Cygwin/XFree86 has so few co
--- Mlarcvaernas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think that a Rootless mode for the Xserver right now
> is one of the most important and crucial features
> needed. For the Xserver to be used in a way that is
> convenient for many users, the option to have X
> applications displayed on the main Win
Good point Alexander.
On a side note: Why is it that XDarwin has so many people contributing
code and features (they seem to have an OpenGL-passthrough system now,
which is pretty amazing), while Cygwin/XFree86 has so few contributors?
This seems contradictory because Windows is on 95% of de
Really? Thanks for the insight. Are you willing to sacrifice 20 hours
per week to work on it? No?
In case you didn't notice, rootless mode has been on the To-Do list for
over a year. It is simply difficult and large in scope, thus no one is
working on it. In fact, there isn't really any w
Mlarcvaernas wrote:
> I think that a Rootless mode for the Xserver right now
> is one of the most important and crucial features
> needed. For the Xserver to be used in a way that is
> convenient for many users, the option to have X
> applications displayed on the main Windows desktop is
> pretty
> -Original Message-
> From: Schaible, Jorg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2002 6:02 PM
> please keep also in mind, that the decoration of a window in
> X is coming from the X Window Manager. Windows always counts
> the border as part ot the Window itself. If y
Hi Rob,
>> One Win32 window per top-level X windows isn't an
>> optimization... it's just necessary. A top-level window is
>> like a Windows window with a blue border... any other window
>> could be a button or a scrollbar, etc. We certainly don't
>> want to create a Win32 window for each o
Thank you for pointing this out. :-) I doesn't know that in
this detail
Regards
Ralf
> -Original Message-
> From: Harold Hunt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2002 7:01 AM
> To: Robert Collins; Ian Burrell
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: rootless mode
>
>
> Rob,
>
> One Win32 window per top-level X windows
Ian Burrell
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: rootless mode
>
>
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Ian Burrell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2002 5:30 AM
> > To: Robert Collins
> > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> &
> -Original Message-
> From: Ian Burrell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2002 5:30 AM
> To: Robert Collins
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: rootless mode
>
>
> Robert Collins wrote:
> > I've been thinking about root
Robert Collins wrote:
> I've been thinking about rootless mode.
>
> Here's my current thoughts:
>
> 1) We create a real win32 window for each X window.
I think we only need a Win32 window for each top-level X window.
> 2) We use SetWindowLong to store the X window pointer in the WIN32
> stru
Ralf,
In a single word, the ntxlib project is "worthless" as far as Cygwin/XFree86
is concerned. There are a few functions, such as line drawing, where looking
at how ntxlib calls the GDI function may be interesting, but the data
structures and overall architecture of ntxlib (and libw11) are
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf
> Of Robert Collins
> Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 10:13 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: rootless mode
>
>
> I've been thinking about rootless mode.
>
> Here's my current thoughts:
>
> 1) We create
> -Original Message-
> From: Alan Hourihane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 6:32 PM
> > That's not a problem. I'll #define all the rootless related
> changes as
> > such. And I'm not asking your focus to change!
> >
> Sorry Robert, I don't mean to put you o
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 06:28:23 +1000, Robert Collins wrote:
> > Once we have a Native GDI server and it passes the xtest
> > suite then, we should start looking at 'rootless' modes, but
> > feel free to continue down your path. I just don't want to
> > clutter up code yet with something else
> -Original Message-
> From: Alan Hourihane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 6:21 PM
> Robert,
>
> I agree with your above suggestions, but we are still a way
> off doing anything 'rootless' yet. We need a fully functional
> native GDI server, which it curre
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 06:12:33 +1000, Robert Collins wrote:
> I've been thinking about rootless mode.
>
> Here's my current thoughts:
>
> 1) We create a real win32 window for each X window.
> 2) We use SetWindowLong to store the X window pointer in the WIN32
> struct, so that when a message
98 matches
Mail list logo
