🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <4565@m1.cs.man.ac.uk>
	lilleyc@cs.man.ac.uk (Chris Lilley) writes:

>However [the VT1000] has no display postscript and certainly no PEX.
>So either
>
>a)  xdpyinfo is in error and asking the wrong questions, or
>b)  the server is in error and giving the wrong answers.
>
>I tend to favour the latter theory.

I just looked at xdpyinfo and it just called XListExtensions, which
returns an array of extension names.  Inside the sample server, the
array is returned based on the extensions which are initialized.  Have
you tried a small test program that tried to query one of these
extensions and/or open it?

>How is an application supposed to determine the capabilities
>of the server??

Exactly the way xdpyinfo does.  However, attempting to open an
advertized extension may fail.  For instance, the PEX extension may
fail on the VT1000 when it doesn't have enough memory/bit-planes, etc.
A better method, I feel, would be to not advertize the extension if
there aren't resources to let it be opened.  The PEX-SI fails to be
listed in the R5 sample server if the init routine for the PEX
extension can't find the PEX fonts.  (I bumped into this when I
compiled the SI for hp300 machines at the U of U.)

						-- Rich
-- 
	Repeal the personal income tax; vote Libertarian in 1992.
Disclaimer: I speak for myself, except as noted; Copyright 1992 Rich Thomson
UUCP: ...!uunet!dsd.es.com!rthomson			Rich Thomson
Internet: rthomson@dsd.es.com	IRC: _Rich_		PEXt Programmer