Date: Thu, 15 Apr 1999 13:44:44 +0300 (IDT)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender: eliz AT is
To: Arron Shutt <version8 AT ashutt DOT demon DOT co DOT uk>
cc: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: DJGPP: the future is... forward?
In-Reply-To: <009801be85f4$60c39f20$af52989e@default>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.990415134418.26213a-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk


On Tue, 13 Apr 1999, Arron Shutt wrote:

> 3. X
> 
> Someone has mention porting X, and porting Gnome as well would give Dos/Win
> users the advantages of using the API for porting across software using
> X/Gnome...

There used to be a port of X library and of a window manager to DJGPP
v1.x; the URL where the sources are can be found in the FAQ (section
22.3).  Using that port as a starting point for v2.x port would be one
approach.  The main portions that need to be reworked are the
low-level graphics support (v1.x remapped the VGA memory to a constant
address, which isn't possible in v2.x) and the event queue that
combines keyboard and mouse events (v1.x had special support for this
in the go32 DOS extender).

Given the progress made in projects like Allegro and GRX, I'd think
that the effort of reporting X to DJGPP v2 should not be too large.

My personal opinion is that a DJGPP port of X would be a *tremendous*
step forward, since a lot of free software that uses GUI relies on X
and X-based packages.