Article View: comp.windows.x
Article #25172Re: X on MS-DOS?
From: speter
Date: Sun, 29 Mar 1987 07:43
Date: Sun, 29 Mar 1987 07:43
65 lines
3260 bytes
3260 bytes
In article <17364@ti-csl.CSNET> peters@ti-csl.CSNET (Pat Peters) writes:
>We're looking into developing code for a PC (AT clone of some sort) to make
>it a network connected "smart terminal". What I've heard described is kind
>of a cross between BLT (5620) capabilities and X (from what little I know
>about X). Goodies would include:
>
> - The ability to download code from the host (a Unix system of
> some sort) across the network
This is an easy solution. Your Unix system should have a routine called
TFTP. If not there is another routine, which you can buy yourself if you
have to, called Kermit.
Use your man pages on the Unix system to learn about TFTP.
> - Windows, color, bit map graphics, mouse, etc
As of yet, we, MIT, to the best of my knowledge see no way of putting
X on a PC of any type, save the RT when it is in Unix mode.
I suggest you buy Microsoft Windows or other such package for your
work. I have heard good things about it.
> - Enough intelligence in the MS-DOS applications to handle routine
> dealings with humans and give concise commands across the network
> to the host.
There are ways to do this. The best way, or at least one of the best is
the telnet or rlogin routine which is supported by Unix. The essencially
make your PC look like a smart periferal. The are other command such as
rsh is Unix which can be of use. The big thing is to get started. You
should have enough information from here to do just that.
>X seems a good place to start for window management, etc. Because MS-DOS
>isn't multi-tasking, we'll have all of those problems to deal with--if
>something happens involving two or more windows, it's up to our code to
>remember to update them all.
>
>I'm no expert on X, so I'm wondering:
>
> - Has anyone worked with X on MS-DOS?
X does not work on MS-DOS.
> - Is there some basic structural 'feature' of X that won't work
> on MS-DOS?
It was developed by Brown U. for use exclusively on a Unix system.
I fear that were one able to port it to a PC you would need something
on the order of 30Meg to hold just it.
{
> - In general, are we going to have LOTS of problems?
>
>Any input is appreciated. Please respond by E-mail. I don't follow these
>boards too closely. I will be happy to post summaries if there is
>interest.
>
>--
>Patrick Peters UUCP: ut-sally!im4u!ti-csl!tifsie!pat
>Texas Instruments sun!texsun!ti-csl!tifsie!pat
>PO Box 655012 M/S 3635 uiucdcs!convex!smu!tifsie!pat
>Dallas, TX 75265 Voice: (214)995-2786
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<387@bacchus.MIT.EDU>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!water!watnot!watmath!clyde!rutgers!mit-eddie!bacchus!speterReferences:
<17364@ti-csl.CSNET>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!water!watnot!watmath!clyde!rutgers!mit-eddie!bacchus!speter From: speter@bacchus.UUCP Newsgroups: comp.windows.x,comp.sys.ibm.pc Subject: Re: X on MS-DOS? Message-ID: <387@bacchus.MIT.EDU> Date: Sun, 29-Mar-87 02:43:41 EST Article-I.D.: bacchus.387 Posted: Sun Mar 29 02:43:41 1987 Date-Received: Sun, 29-Mar-87 17:28:53 EST References: <17364@ti-csl.CSNET> Sender: daemon@bacchus.MIT.EDU Reply-To: speter@athena.mit.edu (Peter Osgood) Organization: MIT Project Athena Lines: 65 Keywords: MS-DOS PC-DOS X