#Unix 486 woes
4 messages in this thread
#Unix 486 woes — declared parent_msg_num=(none), resolved parent_id points to #(none)
I called Snitily's (sp?) r.e. getting gcc and X11 binaries to run on top of
a "minimal" SCO or Interactive system. I was a little disappointed by the
response, which may just show my naivite about Unix. They told me that I
would probably have to get the developers' system for any Unix I picked,
since I would need the system include files if I were to compile gcc or
X11. I told them I really only wanted binaries, but there seems to be a
catch 22; the include files are proprietary, so I can't get a proper
compiled gcc unless I have the stuff to compile it on my own. I'm not sure
I buy this. I was also told that I would need to have TCP/IP to run X11r5
(though I sensed some uncertainty in this comment). Anyway, If I need to
get all this junk, I am back up to ~$1500. minimum, BEFORE I get the
binaries for X11 (the developers' modules are ~$600 to $1500 alone, on top
of the basic Unix system).
I find this incredibly frustrating. I feel compelled to learn and develop
in Unix, since I work in scientific research and programming, but I find it
damn hard to justify spending $2000. for a new file system. I do a lot of
cellular automata calculations (actually, lattice gas flow simulations),
and right now I am using Zortech's C++/386. I'm able to use all my memory
with 32-bit addressing, and by coding my inner loops in asm, my 486/33 is
running 4 times faster than the fastest Sparc at work. There is some
pressure for me to write this stuff in X11, so it will run on a wider
variety of machines; but right now I tell the people who want to run the
programs to spend $3000 on a 486 and run the code under DOS and DPMI/32.
Pardon the bitching. I'm just not used to having to work this hard to get
people to SELL me a product. I wonder if the failure to provide a
reasonablypriced Unix will eventually kill the 80×86 line. …Thanks,
Harlan Stockman…
#1794-#Unix 486 woes — declared parent_msg_num=1794, resolved parent_id points to #1794
I'm sorry that the company gave you so much trouble. When people ask me
why if Unix is so great why doesn't everyone use it, my answer is that the
people who make Unix products are often clueless when it comes on how to
market and/or support their products. If Bill Gates had come to PCs from
Unix rather than from CP/M, we'd all be running Unix today.
Anyway, to get to your questions. You don't need TCP/IP to run X11.
Streams, yes, TCP/IP no. The default is to run X11 with TCP/IP, X is after
all designed as a network windowing system, but it can and does run without
it. (I'm typing this in an xterm running without the benefit of TCP/IP)
I'm also puzzled why they can't just send you the binaries for your
hardware. That is, after all, what they are advertizing: source and
binaries. You don't need a developer's kit to run X, again I'm running X
on a system right now that didn't require me to compile a darn thing. I
can only suggest that you try the vendor you mentioned, Austin Code Works,
and see if they can do better by you.
From the sounds of it though, merely have an X11R5 server and some clients
won't help with your base problem: developing for Unix as well as extended
DOS. If you're planning on developing for Unix users, you have to get a
developer's kit. While gcc and other GNU software products are freely
available in source code, you need a minimum of the Unix linker and
assembler to pull gcc together. It's not a job to start with when you're
new to Unix.
Another point is that if the users are using Sparcs, than they may or may
not be running X. OpenWindows is X based, but SunView is based on the NeWs
windowing system, which is another kettle of fish entirely. If you're
developing for Sparcs, you really need to work on Sparcs. Solaris 2.0, the
upcoming version of SunOS, will run on i386 platforms as well as Sparcs,
but the basic C development kit will be unbundled this time around so for
your purposes, i386 Solaris won't be a cheap approach.
Continued Next Message
#1798-#Unix 486 woes — declared parent_msg_num=1798, resolved parent_id points to #1798
OK, none of these alternatives are cheap. The best approach might be to
try to make your code as portable as possible. Again, X is just a
windowing system. From the sounds of it, there's no real need to make your
application a true X or OpenWindows application. If you can get it to
compile on the users' Unix systems, then its users can run it inside an
xterm window.
Anyway you look at it, developing across platforms is a pain.
Good luck again with your project.
Steven [Shopper]
#1799-Unix 486 woes — declared parent_msg_num=1799, resolved parent_id points to #1799
Thanks for your time. I may try the BSD386 system (described in DDJ), but
I'm told the production version won't come out until June. It will be about
$1000. for everything, but it looks like I'll have to get a tape drive 1st
(another $300.).
I've decided to keep my current lattice gas stuff in extended DOS/386, but
I'll need to delve into Unix and X11 just to keep up with the times. I've
looked at the graphics programming in X, and it looks (1) versatile, and
(2) convoluted. I doubt that an Xserver could keep up with my current
plotting routines, but I suspect the X graphics would be just fine if I had
a faster video board.
Thanks again; maybe I'll have more questions for you some day, when I
finally know what I am doing enough to be specific. …Cheers, Harlan
Stockman…