OpenWindows 3.1
Bruce Bigby
I recently downloaded OpenWindows 3.1 along with the proper X fonts from raven,
downloaded bison from MWCBBS and built and installed OpenWindows 3.1. I must
say, it looks MUCH better than twm. I've even noticed that it runs more
smoothly than twm on my lowly 386/25 DX and, as long as I don't run xv and
look at a lot of gifs, I can do real work--for example, open 3 or 4 xvt windows
and compile to programs with the MWC C compiler. Gnu C is out of the question.
Ah, I can hardly wait for virtual memory. My system often hits a wall when
I try to view large GIF images. I only have, gulp, 8 MB. Funny, I remember
when this was a lot of memory and my motherboard will not support additional
memory without a memory card that I can no longer find. When VM arrives, I
will buy a new disk. But,as I said, OpenWindows 3.1 looks great!
Bruce
Harry C Pulley
I wrote a GIF viewer for X11, called vgif.x11.tz on raven. It takes up only
about 200K regardless of the image size. The only 'problem' with it is that
you can't move, iconify or cover up the image since it is not saved by the
program. This is how it saves space: it doesn't bother allocating memory for
the pixmap. I usually look at my GIF and then close the window anyways. Why
would you keep a GIF around all the time? I wouldn't anyhow...
To compile with MWC's X11, you should change -lsocket to -lXbsd.
Yeah, I too have 'only' 8MB of RAM. I run ASC's X11 though. Each client is
about 100-200K smaller than MWC's binary would be so I have more available. I
also cut down my buffer cache size (to 1250), and don't load every driver into
the kernel (I don't use them, so why waste memory on them)? When I am running
2 xvt windows, olwm 3.1, xmeter (shows memory, CPU and disk usage) and xclock,
I still have over 2.5MB free! This is enough room to compile (even
small-medium size programs with gcc will compile in this much space), or do
anything else I want. I can load 5 more average clients or load 3 more and
still have enough memory to do other work. It's pretty good.
My motherboard will take up to 32MB but I can't afford to buy more memory right
now. Maybe later I will. Motif requires 12MB so I guess I'll need to upgrade
eventually.
You should tweak your kernel if you run X a lot. A little fiddling goes a long
way in improving your performance! If you want some specific advice on how to
do this, just let me know.
Harry
--
hpu...@uoguelph.ca |This message released|It takes all kinds,
Harry C. Pulley, IV |to the PUBLIC DOMAIN.|and to each his own.
----------------------------------+---------------------|This thought in mind,
Stay away from the DOS side, Luke!|Un*x don't play that.|I walk alone.
Udo Munk
: I recently downloaded OpenWindows 3.1 along with the proper X fonts from raven,
I also ported olwm to 4.2, it looks exactely like olvwm, has the same
functionality but no VDM, so it needs less memory then olvwm. I believe
I ftp'ed it to raven already (/pub/coherent/incoming) and it should be
available from MWCBBS too. BTW, bison isn't needed anymore under 4.2
to compile the package, the MWC yacc is improved so that it can be used
without problem for packages like ol[v]wm and tin.
--
Udo Munk, Oberstr. 21, 41460 Neuss, Germany
privat: u...@umunk.GUN.de CIS: 100021,2515
work: u...@mwc.com
ANDERSON MARK P
>I also ported olwm to 4.2, it looks exactely like olvwm, has the same
>functionality but no VDM, so it needs less memory then olvwm.
What's VDM?
Harry C Pulley
: In article <94021...@umunk.GUN.de>, u...@umunk.GUN.de (Udo Munk) writes...
: >I also ported olwm to 4.2, it looks exactely like olvwm, has the same
: >functionality but no VDM, so it needs less memory then olvwm.
: What's VDM?
Virtual Display Manager I think. It allows you to have many virtual screens
worth of real estate. This way you don't need to iconify or cover up
everything when you have lots of windows open. Instead you can have a working
screen, a games screen, a comm. screen, a backup progress screen, etc.
I just ported olvwm 4, BTW.
Udo Munk
: >I also ported olwm to 4.2, it looks exactely like olvwm, has the same
: >functionality but no VDM, so it needs less memory then olvwm.
: What's VDM?
Virtual Display Manager. Window managers like olvwm and fvwm are able to
manage several virtual X displays. You see only one of the virtual displays
all the time and the virtual display manager alows you to select another
one. If you are using a windows manager with that feature you don't
have to raise or lower overlapping windows all the time, you can place
your running applications on different virtual displays.
Michael Gerhards
> What's VDM?
Virtual display manager ??
Michael
--
mic...@jester.GUN.de * Michael Gerhards * Voice: +49 2131 82238
-=> FreeBSD 1.0.2 <=- * Preussenstrasse 59 * Modem: +49 2131 80923
* Germany 41464 Neuss * Login guest, no passwd