Scala/X11

seraph · Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 1:14 pm Post subject: Scala/X11

I am trying to install Scala 2.21v for OS X 10.4 on my iMacG5 ( http://www.xs4all.nl/~huygensf/scala/downloads.html )
in order to use Scala I need X11 installed ( http://www.xs4all.nl/~huygensf/scala/macinstall.html )
I read that I can install X11 from the OSX installation DVD
the question is:
on that OSX DVD i see a folder called Xcode Tools, inside it I see another folder called "packages", inside it I see "X11SDK.pkg"
I guess it's what I need to install but once installed I should see an X11 icon inside Applications/Utilities/X11 that I don't see. I have already tried rebooting. any suggestion?

mosc · Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 1:26 pm Post subject:

Moved this topic to OSX as a music workstation...

Stein would be the guy to answer this one, but I thought X11 was standard on OSX. What do I know though? dunno

elektro80 · Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 1:29 pm Post subject:

Sure, and I suggest you get it here

seraph · Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 1:31 pm Post subject:

seraph · Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 1:33 pm Post subject:

elektro80 · Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 1:38 pm Post subject:

Nope, I simply wanted to save you the hard work it is to find the DVD and then carry it over to the computer and then insert it in the DVD media slot in the iMac.

But hey, I am not offering my help to decorate your living room and mow the lawn.

seraph · Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 1:41 pm Post subject:

the error message says I can't install the version you told me to download because a newer version is already installed (the one on DVD) Crying or Very sad

X11pic.jpg

Description:

Filesize:

84.56 KB

Viewed:

291 Time(s)

This image has been reduced to fit the page. Click on it to enlarge.

elektro80 · Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 1:47 pm Post subject:

Dunno.. well.. this means it is sitting on your drive already?

Wooha!

seraph · Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 2:05 pm Post subject:

on the "About Xcode Tools.pdf" on the 10.4 OSX DVD I read:

elektro80 · Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 2:14 pm Post subject:

Frankly I don´t know. I think I might have followed X11 on OS X from the very start. I have installed them all and never had problems at all. I am not getting it.

seraph · Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 2:31 pm Post subject:

this is what I read on the same .pdf:

Kassen · Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 3:02 pm Post subject:

elektro80 · Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 3:05 pm Post subject:

I cannot see why X11 won´t run.

seraph · Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 3:06 pm Post subject:

elektro80 · Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 3:13 pm Post subject:

Ignore xcode.. or .. rather.. you might want the lot in there anyway.. the AU host app and all that you know...

It is X11 you want.

elektro80 · Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 3:13 pm Post subject:

mosc · Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 8:06 pm Post subject:

I've got an X11 icon too and clicking on it starts the X11 server. I can run a terminal from that little window and then x applications work. xclock is a quick and easy test to see if it is working.

What does OSX use for windows if not X11? Some other thing. I don't get it. A Unix system should just run X. Can you run OSX without a window manager? If so, what command do you type to start the window manger?

elektro80 · Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 8:18 pm Post subject:

OS X has its own pretty advanced windowing system. Check out the Apple developer site for more on this. The OS X X11 windowing server is used for apps which are built for the "crossplatform" X11 windowing system.

Try http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X11 for more on what X11 is.

For OS X stuff try http://developer.apple.com/referencelibrary/index.html

See also X11 Basics for OS X

Read more about OS X and graphics here: Quartz

and here: Graphics & Imaging

elektro80 · Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 8:26 pm Post subject:

elektro80 · Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 8:29 pm Post subject:

A point to make is that a modern windowing system/ graphics display system should be just what Quartz is, namely both resolution- and device-independent. And yes, this is a close relative to the DisplayPostscript.

elektro80 · Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 8:33 pm Post subject:

Now I am expecting brinxmat to tell us that displays are overrated. Everything of essence would be printed directly to the matrix printer anyway, so who would ever need any kind of CRT or display on a computer anyway. Laughing

Just kidding!

elektro80 · Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 8:43 pm Post subject:

As for Aqua, this is rather the look and feel of the windowing and objects within the GUI and not the graphics system as such. Aqua is quite possible to hack. If you want to, you can spend some weeks building a RatFink version which looks very different.
In order to make windows work and all that you wil have to keep various objects and conform to certain GUI and object rules, but still.. it is possible to hack Aqua into something completely different.

elektro80 · Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 8:51 pm Post subject:

It is possible to bypass Aqua.

First of all you will have to tell open firmware too boot verbosely and you will have to edit /etc/ttys

You will then be able to bypass Login and instead be dumped into text gui console mode.

Here is one article about this: http://hacks.oreilly.com/pub/h/348

elektro80 · Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 9:05 pm Post subject: Re: Scala/X11

mosc · Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 9:25 pm Post subject:

http://developer.apple.com/referencelibrary/GraphicsImaging/idxQuartz-date.html

The article says Quartz is like X, only better.

Sun used a similar postscript based graphics system about 17 years ago. It was called OpenWindows or something. Better than X, of course, just like the Sparc and PowerPC processors were better than Intel. Now Sun is running X and Intel processorsl. Apple may be going the same way - maybe not.

Microsoft is also running an underlying graphics system that is better than X, just like their Netbui network was better than TCP/IP, as was Apple Talk better.

Companies always have technology that is better than whatever you can name,

I don't expect Apple or MS switching to X because they will loose the lock on their proprietary business. They need to make X a second class citizen on their machines, else people will not need their OSes at all.

X11 really isn't a window manager even though the name X Windows is used a lot. X is also an underlying device independent graphics system as the authors of Quartz describe their system. There are dozens of window managers written for X. Many are excellent - superior to the OSX and XP managers, IMHO.

XP and OSX have pretty good window managers, but window mangers are as different at people. It's good to be able to use whatever one you want. X applications can run on any platform. Of course you can run X on top of OSX and XP, but these aren't really the best ways to do it.

Anyhow, when I said Unix systems should run X (natively) I was thinking that all of them do, except OSX. It may be based on BSD, but it's gone far enough along the path of being "better" that it doesn't feel like Unix to me. I'm always running into unexpected differences. But I've been using Unix since 1979.

Remember, when Microsoft came out with NT, Bill Gates was asked why he didn't release a Unix system. He said, "NT is Unix, only better".

I think it is a shame the OSX and XP have their own proprietary underlying graphics with all their native applications only running in their proprietary window managers. If they used X, then you could open a window on your OSX, Linux, or XP machine and run applications that are running on any of the other platforms.

All this is OT, sorry...