thanks for your help to everybody!
i wasn’t aware, that qnx configuration is included in vanilla xfree4.2
seems to compile flawlessly out of the box, which it does right now, so i’ll
see you in a few hours
<firstname.lastname@example.org> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
Jens H Jorgensen <> email@example.com> > wrote:
Let me know if you need some help in getting XFree86 4.2 up and running
under QNX 6.1, and can give you an example XF86Config-4 and a startx
that will make it work.
you don’t need an example XF86Config-4, “XFree86 -configure” will generate
one for you, for your graphics card/monitor. You can use the resulting
config file as base, modify as needed (such as pick another color depth
as for “startx” script, i never had a need to tweak that. the default
one should just work.
btw Joerg, all your questions should have been answered in the mailing
subscribe/browse the mailing list for more info.
Regarding Qt/X11 it got the QT library and the basic tools (qmake,
compiled successfully. The compile did die during compilation of the
designer, and I have simply not had the time to look at that and I only
the library and the basic tools.
“Joerg Scherer” <> joerg.schererNOSPAM@am3.com> > wrote in message
news:a7a31m$k1n$> firstname.lastname@example.org> …
- who wants to carry around a networked windowing environment
when she doesn’t need it (slow and memory intensive)
Did you use XFree86 4.1 with QNX6.1 ??
no, as i mentioned new to qnx. i downloaded your port from sourceforge,
honestly i didn’t figure out how to get it up running. hint: short
would help big time >
i’m really clueless. i think i would have to start up X instead at
i’m used to using X under several *nixen, which means either sysadmin
done setting it up for me or (linux) having comfortable tools for
up my graphic card etc., fiddling with modlines manually scares me off,
but maybe all this is easyly accomplished…
My impression is it isn’t slow and the memory footprint are in the
this is astonishing to me! i would have guessed, that photon should by
nature be faster and be far less memory extensive.
can’t understand memory footprint being equal, as photon has no network
modell i think.
speed: should be a minor issue nowadays, one architekture could beat
other by factors and it wouldn’t even be recogniseable by the user. on
other hand: this surely is true for desktop systems, but on an embedded
target, where you typically have an older 1-2mb graphic-card?
an other point could be: while photon could in principle be faster than
would guess xfree drivers are much better optimized than qssl drivers
- the major advantage imho is directly drawing to the framebuffer,
qt/e to qt/x11 on linux, main purpose: avoiding X
my personal point of view:
i’m new to qnx, i used xt/motif and qt before. now i find myself
Why ? Qt works with XFree86.
all this is of minor concern to me right now, we won’t consider
for our current project, but in the future (read: next year) this could
couldn’t get x running qt didn’t compile out of the box…
perhaps i should give it another try, if time permitts.