[lug] Local Open Source Project Leads/Managers

D. Stimits stimits at idcomm.com
Wed Mar 14 16:05:13 MST 2001 

"D. Stimits" wrote:
> 
> "Riggs, Robert" wrote:
> >
> > Two things:
> >
> > Regarding the font problem, generally it occurs when web designers/tools set
> > pixel (px) font sizes in their style sheets, instead of point (pt) sizes.
> > Your 8 pixel font might look fine on your 1024x768 screen (or under Windows,
> > which doesn't really allow pixel sized fonts, per se), but it will look like
> > a small smudge on my 1600x1200 screen. One other problem is that Netscape's
> 
> FYI, I am running 1600x1200 on one monitor, 1280x1024 on another. I
> suspect that Netscape has a flaw when trying to override font sizes and
> they are specified in pixel size, as you mention above.
> 
> > default font scaling is too severe. Adding the following to my ~/.Xdefaults
> > file really helped: "Netscape.documentFonts.sizeIncrement:  15".
> >
> > I would recommend that anyone considering CORBAfying their software stay
> > away from ORBit, if at all possible. In its current incarnation, it is not a
> > fully functioning ORB. However, it is one of the only ORBs with C bindings
> > available. I've been using omniORB for a bit and am very happy with it. It
> > will work well for anyone needing C++ or Python bindings. I was really glad
> > to see this project using it.
> 
> It would be interesting to see dual support for both ORBit and omniORB.
> My reason being that many gnome/gtk apps will support ORBit without
> modification, whereas each app would require optimization to run under
                                               ^^^^^^^^^^^^
Bad wording, I have MMX asm on my brain today. "modification" is the
correct word.

> omniORB. What would be even more interesting is if gnome could be made
> to run correctly (without quirks) under omniORB, or even to write an
> interface to allow omniORB and ORBit to transparently talk to each
> other.
> 
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: D. Stimits [mailto:stimits at idcomm.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2001 1:01 PM
> > To: lug at lug.boulder.co.us
> > Subject: Re: [lug] Local Open Source Project Leads/Managers
> >
> > Steve Houston wrote:
> > >
> > > Sorry I have taken so long to reply....
> > >
> > > > "D. Stimits" <stimits at idcomm.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I have an interest in a game project, which is currently under
> > > > discussion of redesign. I recently converted old C code to a C++
> > > > version, with the intent of redesigning it in parts, which is turning
> > > > out to be slow. But the short explanation is that there is interest in
> > > > creating an OpenGL version and starting with a client and server that
> > > > use some of the old ideas, but not much of the original code.
> > > > http://www.battlefieldlinux.com
> > >
> > > Cool... that's an interesting project.
> >
> > It still has some work to be done before it gains popularity.
> >
> > >
> > > > Unfortunately, the web page is difficult to read; my Netscape shows the
> > > > fonts as tiny and not very good resolution, even though I've tried to
> > > > force both fixed and variable width fonts to 24 point (I'd estimate that
> > > > http://www.3dwm.org/frameset.html is showing up at approximately the
> > > > same size as a 6 point font, and lots of aliasing). Basically, some of
> > > > the web pages are not readable (I'd have to do a copy and paste to vi or
> > > > something to see what it says). Contrary to all the above whining, I am
> > > > able to read the php pages, which apparently use a different font (it's
> > > > still small, but I can read most of it).
> > >
> > > I've let our webmaster know about the problems you had and he'll try and
> > > address them shortly.
> >
> > I have seen other web sites like this, the webmasters never could figure
> > out why it was doing it. Presumably it has something to do with
> > Netscape's font handling (or lack there of).
> >
> > >
> > > > What I am curious about is that this says it is not a window manager.
> > > > But it appears it requires an X11 server in the background.
> > >
> > > Currently X11 is required for 2 reasons:
> > >
> > > 1) OpenGL acceleration. Essentially, to get good OpenGL driver support
> > > you have to be running XFree86 4.0 with DRI. We plan to move away X
> > > (mainly because of it's large memory/resource requirements and our
> > > interest in wearable computers), which will probably involve SDL or GGI.
> > > Currently though, these don't offer the same level of hardware
> > > acceleration as X/DRI.
> > >
> > > 2) Support for regular 2D applications. This is achieved by running X11
> > > (either locally or remotely) and displaying the X desktop in our 3D
> > > environment using VNC. You can an example of this on the screenshots
> > > page.
> > >
> > > > Is it
> > > > possible to run all the regular applications in this environment?
> > >
> > > Yep :)
> > >
> > > > Can
> > > > something like the gnome ORB and security methods still be used?
> > >
> > > We aren't using ORBit (which is what gnome uses), instead we use
> > > omniORB. We haven't looked at security too much so far, we are still in
> > > the initial stages of building the UI. Can you give an example of what
> > > you are proposing?
> >
> > Basically this was combining two related questions, and is a bit
> > misleading the way I asked it. I ask about the gnome ORB because there
> > are a lot of applications that use this as a substitute to the COM/DCOM
> > model in windows. Anything working correctly with the gnome ORB has an
> > advantage for inter-application communications. In terms of security,
> > xauth and xhost mechanisms (optionally kerberos) can be used with X11,
> > and I think the gnome ORB might have some knowledge of this to allow it
> > to work smoothly with those methods.
> >
> > >
> > > > Requirements show the need for cavelib to be installed, but not
> > > > multiprocessor...I happen to run a couple of SMP machines, I'm curious
> > > > if the 3dwm works well with SMP?
> > >
> > > Hmmm, that shouldn't be in the requirements. Where did you see that, I'd
> > > like to fix it. You only need cavelib if you are actually running in a
> > > CAVE.
> >
> > Apparently I saw this in the 3D-CUBE listing, and assumed it went with
> > the rest of the items, but in reality does not.
> >
> > >
> > > We haven't done any testing on an SMP system, however I believe it will
> > > beneficial. 3dwm uses a threaded client/server architecture. The server
> > > is responsible for rendering the 3D environment and the client(s) are
> > > responsible for generating the world content (building the scene graph).
> > > I think this should scale nicely on multiple CPUs.
> > >
> > > > I guess my main problem with trying this all out is that cavelib appears
> > > > to be commercial only.
> > >
> > > Our mistake, it will run fine without cavelib.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Steve.
> >
> > I'm curious if the future version, that does not require X11 but runs on
> > Linux, will have support for multiple or remote displays?
> >
> > Also, has any kind of benchmarking been done? I'm curious if this
> > dedicated 3D has any speed advantages over hardware OpenGL on a regular
> > X11 display? It seems like the possibility is there, I like the idea a
> > lot.
> >
> > D. Stimits, stimits at idcomm.com
> > _______________________________________________
> > Web Page:  http://lug.boulder.co.us
> > Mailing List: http://lists.lug.boulder.co.us/mailman/listinfo/lug
> > _______________________________________________
> > Web Page:  http://lug.boulder.co.us
> > Mailing List: http://lists.lug.boulder.co.us/mailman/listinfo/lug
> _______________________________________________
> Web Page:  http://lug.boulder.co.us
> Mailing List: http://lists.lug.boulder.co.us/mailman/listinfo/lug

More information about the LUG mailing list