Very Computer

Motif 2.0 is out.  We are working on porting Motif 2.0 to Linux.

In the meantime, allow me to explain how to make our Linux Motif work
with XFree86-3.1.
Yes, *ia, Motif 1.2.x does work with X11R6, but we have
to rely on the magic of shared libraries and dynamic linking.

The short answer:

Install the libX11 and libXt of XFree86-2.1, and Motif will work.
(Also be sure /usr/X386/lib is in your /etc/ld.so.conf, and run ldconfig.)
The filename is XF86-2.1-lib.tar.gz, and it is available from
your friendly neighborhood Linux archive.  Use archie to find one near you.

The long answer:

Motif applications compiled with 1.2.4 WILL WORK with XFree86-3.1 (X11R6).
However, Motif 1.2.4 is based on X11R5, and it depends on
R5's libX11 and libXt.  So all you need to do is keep those libraries
(libX11 and libXt) from XFree86-2.1 installed on your system.
Through the magic of dynamic linking, the proper libraries will be
linked in.

I agree it would be nice if Motif would work seamlessly with R6,
but this is the way things are:

  XFree86-2.1 is based on X11R5.
  XFree86-3.1 is based on X11R6.
          X11R5 != X11R6
Motif 1.2.4 is      based on X11R5.
Motif 2.0   is      based on X11R5.
Motif 2.1   will be based on X11R6. (?)

Linux's shared dynamic linker (ld.so) provides a [IMHO solution] work-around,
and in fact the whole concept of major versions of shared libraries
was designed exactly for a situation like this.

Quote:>As I have no plan to keep old libraries taking the disk-space, I removed
>motif from the disk altogether. Would somebody give me $100 for this
>package ?

/usr/X386/lib/libX11.sa         157756
/usr/X386/lib/libXt.sa           80440
/usr/X386/lib/libX11.so.3.1.0   320516
/usr/X386/lib/libXt.so.3.1.0    291844

For a total of 850556 bytes.  Plus a couple of symbolic links
that ldconfig(8) will make.  I don't know...that doesn't seem like
a whole lot of space to me, but disk space is a scarce resource,
and everyone has to set his own priorities.

Bottom line is that we support our customers, and we are working on
providing the latest technology both in X and Motif.
Pay no attention to the boilerplate:  I am speaking for Metro Link this time.
--

"Do not play this piece fast.  It is never right to play Ragtime fast." Joplin

Now, as you have chosen to speak for Metrolink would you like to clarify
a few things ?

        1.When do you propose to make Motif 2.0 for Linux available ? How
          much would it cost me to upgrade ? [You did not reply to the
          e-mail in which I had asked these questions.]

        2.Why is it that none of your adverti*ts (e.g., on tsx-11.mit.edu)
          indicate that Motif 1.2.4 would *only* run with X11R5 libraries ?
          [Most companies mention the hardware/software requirements in their
          products.]

My decision to buy Metrolik Motif was based on your old ad (replaced on
11 Oct.) on tsx-11.mit.edu, in which future updates were mentioned. At
the time of purchase, I was not told that Metrolink "does not plan to
update 1.2.4" although all of us knew that XFree86 3.1 was about to be
released and XFree86 3.0 (X11R6) was available. What if I was running
XFree86 3.0 ?

Quote:> In the meantime, allow me to explain how to make our Linux Motif work
> with XFree86-3.1.
> Yes, *ia, Motif 1.2.x does work with X11R6, but we have
> to rely on the magic of shared libraries and dynamic linking.

Quote:

> The short answer:

> Install the libX11 and libXt of XFree86-2.1, and Motif will work.
> (Also be sure /usr/X386/lib is in your /etc/ld.so.conf, and run ldconfig.)
> The filename is XF86-2.1-lib.tar.gz, and it is available from
> your friendly neighborhood Linux archive.  Use archie to find one near you.

Quote:> The long answer:

> Motif applications compiled with 1.2.4 WILL WORK with XFree86-3.1 (X11R6).
> However, Motif 1.2.4 is based on X11R5, and it depends on
> R5's libX11 and libXt.  So all you need to do is keep those libraries
> (libX11 and libXt) from XFree86-2.1 installed on your system.
> Through the magic of dynamic linking, the proper libraries will be
> linked in.

> I agree it would be nice if Motif would work seamlessly with R6,
> but this is the way things are:

>   XFree86-2.1 is based on X11R5.
>   XFree86-3.1 is based on X11R6.
>           X11R5 != X11R6
> Motif 1.2.4 is      based on X11R5.
> Motif 2.0   is      based on X11R5.
> Motif 2.1   will be based on X11R6. (?)

Quote:> >As I have no plan to keep old libraries taking the disk-space, I removed
> >motif from the disk altogether. Would somebody give me $100 for this
> >package ?

> This sounds to me like cutting off your nose to spite your face.
> Let's see how much space the old libraries actually take up:

>  [list of libraries deleted]

Quote:> Bottom line is that we support our customers, and we are working on
> providing the latest technology both in X and Motif.
> Pay no attention to the boilerplate:  I am speaking for Metro Link this time.

Also, what is your policy regarding those people who have bought or are
going to buy Motif 1.2.4 after X11R6 release ? Are they going to pay the
full price for updating to Motif 2.0 ?

Raj

   I am not trying to put "spin" on things. I posted what I gathered from
   your response. Yes, Motif 2.0 is out, and it is known that Motif-vendors
   are working on it. You are not revealing anything that was not known 30
   days ago when I bought Motif for Linux from you.

   Now, as you have chosen to speak for Metrolink would you like to clarify
   a few things ?

           1.When do you propose to make Motif 2.0 for Linux available ? How
             much would it cost me to upgrade ? [You did not reply to the
             e-mail in which I had asked these questions.]

           2.Why is it that none of your adverti*ts (e.g., on tsx-11.mit.edu)
             indicate that Motif 1.2.4 would *only* run with X11R5 libraries ?
             [Most companies mention the hardware/software requirements in their
             products.]

You know, this is an interesting point of view...A *new* product comes
out (XFree86 3.1) that is *not* compatible with an existing product
(Motif), yet instead of asking why the *new* product is not compatible
with the *existing* product, you choose to question *why* the existing
product is not immediately made compatible with the new product...the
logic is a bit skewed here...

Personally, I think the XFree folks should have consulted more with
the Motif folks *before* releasing their product so that most of these
incompatibility issues could be ironed out...

Also, I noticed a little disclaimer with the XFree stuff, something to
the effect that your X11R5 clients would not work properly with
XFree_3.1, so apparently this "incompatibility" is not just limited to
Motif. I *hope* there are some very good reasons for this apparent
gratuitous incompatibility, because I'd sure hate to have to recompile
or replace all or even most of my x-clients...

[...stuff deleted...]

   The issue is not inadequate disk-space or old libraries. It is fine if
   the author of a freeware does not specify the requirements of running the
   program, but I have not known a commercial software that would not
   specify the software/hardware requirements on its package.

Ummm...perhaps because the XFree folks held the testing so close to
their chests, the "commercial" software vendors were unaware of this
incompatibility till sometime shortly after the "freeware" was released?

Also, it is NOT "okay" for the author of a freeware program to not
specify the requirements of running the program, especially "freeware"
that is being used as the basis for many business applications...

Hopefully next time the XFree folks will be more open about their
testing, and this sort of problem will be eliminated long before a
public release...try looking at the development/testing activities for
the Linux system...*very* open policy, and from what I've seen, the
software is of *very* high quality...perhaps the XFree folk will take
note of that ?

John

--
--
John Burton                      


(804) 865-7491 (voice)           (804) 865-1021 (fax)

: People know that R4 libraries would be needed to compile/run R4 apps
: under X11R5. I am sure that there are many people running old versions of
: Motif with XFree86 3.1.

The problem here is that if an R5 and an R6 program is running then you
have a lot more RAM used for shared libs than you would with a pure R5
or R6 system.

: Again, thanks for the advice. What about reshuffling config (templates, cf,
: rules) files and includes ? Do you imply that Motif apps can be compiled
: with R6 includes and templates without any problem ? My experience
: suggests otherwise.

I found fonts, pathnames, and some includes to be a problem for me too.

: Does it mean that Motif 2.0 would also need X11R5 libraries ?

I got Motif just 3 or 4 weeks ago from ACC (SWiM).  Now I'm wondering if
it will even work when I upgrade and what they'll charge for an upgrade
of Motif.  And if Motif 2.0 will not run on R6... ?????

: Raj

--
csh
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------+

  JB> Personally, I think the XFree folks should have consulted more with
  JB> the Motif folks *before* releasing their product so that most of these
  JB> incompatibility issues could be ironed out...

XFree is a free product, Motif is not. I think that is an important
part of the problem. If Motif were free (its source code) then its
authors (or others) would have made a new release together or shortly
after X11R6 and it would have been naturally included in the XFree
distribution (just like the Athena widgets are now).

I keep finding it extremely irritant that on a 100% free system like
Linux you have to pay (relatively much) for such a tiny part of the
whole like a widget set, and that all restrictions that come from this
(like no source code availability) is causing all this grief.

I am looking forward to the day (and pray that it will ever come :)
that there is a free alternative of Motif available. Maybe X11R6's
Fresco or the FWF will provide such an alternative.
--
Peter Mutsaers                  |  AT Computing bv,  P.O. Box 1428,

tel. work: +31 (0)80 527248     |
tel. home: +31 (0)3405 71093    |  "... En..., doet ie het al?"

: : People know that R4 libraries would be needed to compile/run R4 apps
: : under X11R5. I am sure that there are many people running old versions of
: : Motif with XFree86 3.1.

: The problem here is that if an R5 and an R6 program is running then you
: have a lot more RAM used for shared libs than you would with a pure R5
: or R6 system.

: : Again, thanks for the advice. What about reshuffling config (templates, cf,
: : rules) files and includes ? Do you imply that Motif apps can be compiled
: : with R6 includes and templates without any problem ? My experience
: : suggests otherwise.

: I found fonts, pathnames, and some includes to be a problem for me too.

: : Does it mean that Motif 2.0 would also need X11R5 libraries ?

: I got Motif just 3 or 4 weeks ago from ACC (SWiM).  Now I'm wondering if
: it will even work when I upgrade and what they'll charge for an upgrade
: of Motif.  And if Motif 2.0 will not run on R6... ?????

: : Raj

I didn't have 'religious wars' in mind when starting this thread. I only
wanted to know if there will be an update that uses XFree86 3.1 libs.
It's a technical problem for me - I want to use X11R6 features within the
Motif environment. As X11R5 apps still work (and I've got an awful lot of
them since I update my system no more than once a year) and as I don't want
to recompile them all, I don't see the point in maintaining X11R5 sharedlibs.
It's a pity that I have to wait even longer ... in the meantime, I'll
do X11R6 testing with Athena widgets.

For what I've tested myself, I can compile Motif apps with X11R6 includes;
but when linking, I have to use the 'old' R5 libs. And I don't see any
reason why Motif apps (or any old X11R5 apps) shouldn't compile with R6
includes - R4 apps compile with R5 includes very well, and added entrys
withing the include file usually don't make troubles - just changed entrys.

But there's one major problem that should be fixed (somehow). With Metrolink
Motif, there came the mxmkmf script that correctly called imake with Motif
templates. This no longer works for me. I don't know enough about configuring
imake, I'm just using it, so please could someone point me out what to do ?

Hey guys: don't just flame Metrolink - I'm more angry about the Slackware
distribution originator. Why the hell does he have to create such a chaos
like /usr/X11, /var/X11 -> ../../X11, /usr/X386 -> X11, and so on ?
This difference /usr <-> /var and the gigantic amount of softlinks between
these dirs cost me half a day to clean up; I just don't want to install
X11R6 (Xfree86 3.1) in /usr/X11 when I still need Xfree86 2.x; but when I
wanted to make sure X11R6 stuff is used preferably, I had to recurse all these
subtrees to delete unecessary things - I now think it would have been easier
to remove all X11R5 stuff, then setup X11R6 and after that, untarring the
needed files from X11R5 to /tmp and selecting the necessary things - But
how should I know before ?

One more thing:
Is there already a release date for Motif 2.0 ?

ok, I've got to go now, it's lunch time -- see you on monday.

Bye

Frank

Quote:>Personally, I think the XFree folks should have consulted more with
>the Motif folks *before* releasing their product so that most of these
>incompatibility issues could be ironed out...

Note also that this is a non-issue.  Having XFree 3.1 does not preclude
you from installing libraries from XFree 2.1.1.  Applications linked
with the libraries from XFree 2.1.1 will run against the XFree 3.1
server.

---
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, our problem stems from the fact that we, basically, allow every planet
and moon-base this side of Alpha Centauri to make their own version of Spam.
                                                        "Mystery Meat"
                                                        Man... or Astroman?

But I don't think it's a beta issue or an XFree86 issue at all.
IMHO, it's pointless to point fingers.

comp.windows.x.motif:
The simple fact is that X and Motif are on different development cycles.
There are going to be incompatibilities between the two products,
and there are features in the newer one (X) that the older one (Motif)
cannot exploit.

For developing and compiling new applications, Motif 1.2.4 simply was
not designed to work in an R6 environment.  (I keep thinking of making
water run uphill.)  You cannot make Motif 1.2.4 use features of X11R6
it was not designed to use.  If you could, it probably would not be
Motif 1.2.4 any longer.

comp.os.linux.admin:
Whether XFree86-3.1's X libraries should or should not be compatible
with 2.1's, I don't know.  I've heard speculations both ways.  What I do
know is that the men doing the Linux shared X libraries have been doing
them for longer than a lot of us have been using Linux, so they should
know a thing or two about Linux shared libraries.  Plus, the XC bumped
the major version numbers.  I think they're trying to tell us something.
(But who knows, maybe not.  Our 1.2.3 was not compatible with our 1.2.2. :-( )
--

"Do not play this piece fast.  It is never right to play Ragtime fast." Joplin

  JB> Personally, I think the XFree folks should have consulted more with
  JB> the Motif folks *before* releasing their product so that most of these
  JB> incompatibility issues could be ironed out...

XFree is a free product, Motif is not. I think that is an important
part of the problem. If Motif were free (its source code) then its
authors (or others) would have made a new release together or shortly
after X11R6 and it would have been naturally included in the XFree
distribution (just like the Athena widgets are now).

I keep finding it extremely irritant that on a 100% free system like
Linux you have to pay (relatively much) for such a tiny part of the
whole like a widget set, and that all restrictions that come from this
(like no source code availability) is causing all this grief.

I am looking forward to the day (and pray that it will ever come :)
that there is a free alternative of Motif available. Maybe X11R6's
Fresco or the FWF will provide such an alternative.
--
Peter Mutsaers                  |  AT Computing bv,  P.O. Box 1428,

tel. work: +31 (0)80 527248     |
tel. home: +31 (0)3405 71093    |  "... En..., doet ie het al?"

Quote:>For developing and compiling new applications, Motif 1.2.4 simply was
>not designed to work in an R6 environment.  (I keep thinking of making
>water run uphill.)

Quote:>comp.os.linux.admin:
>Whether XFree86-3.1's X libraries should or should not be compatible
>with 2.1's, I don't know.  I've heard speculations both ways.  What I do
>know is that the men doing the Linux shared X libraries have been doing
>them for longer than a lot of us have been using Linux, so they should
>know a thing or two about Linux shared libraries.

        Remember, we had an X11R6 distribution in
ftp.yggdrasil.com:pub/software_dist that ran binaries of R5 programs
that can successfully relink against R6 (we even adjusted the jump
tables to reflect procedures that had simply been renamed in R6).

        If XFree86 made their beta releases free and accessible to the
world (like new Linux kernels), the shared library problem would have
been detected and fixed long ago.  I also think that it would result
in more contribution and faster bug detection and bug fixing.
--
Adam J. Richter                           Yggdrasil Computing, Incorporated
(408) 261-6630                            "Free Software For The Rest of Us."

Symbolic links are what makes Linux (and every other Unix) behave sanely with a
variety of programs which expect different paths.  For example, /usr/bin is
linked to /usr/bsd because on some machines certain programs are located only
in /usr/bsd.  I've seen /var/adm as /usr/adm.  There are many more examples of
this.  Theoretically, the Linux File System Standard dictates the directory
structure, but until we stop having to use software not written specifically
for the Linux directory hierarchy, the symbolic links will have to stay.

--

GE -d+ H s+: g-- p? !au a-- w+ v C++++ UL++++ P+>++ L++ 3- E--- N+++ K- !W M--
 V-- -po+(---) Y+ t+ 5 j+ R- G? tv b+ D B- e+ u--- h f+ r n- y? <Linux rules!>