RE: seperate xfree project on sourceforge

["Ralf Habacker" <Ralf dot Habacker at freenet dot de>]

> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: cygwin-xfree-owner@sources.redhat.com
> [mailto:cygwin-xfree-owner@sources.redhat.com]Im Auftrag von Matthew
> Donald
> Gesendet am: Montag, 19. November 2001 09:06
> An: cygwin-xfree@cygwin.com
> Cc: Rasjid Wilcox; Suhaib Siddiqi; Christopher Faylor
> Betreff: Re: seperate xfree project on sourceforge
>
> Hi,
>
> I been keeping winfree86 with a very low profile since its still not really
> ready for release even as alpha code.  However since Ralf Habacker stumbled
> across it, it's time to 'fess up.
>
> Winfree86 does not fork either the cygwin or xfree codebase.  It is much
> more akin to a distribution rather than new product.
>
> Yes, winfree86 does contain some new code, but I can't see how it can easily
> be incorporated into the existing project.  The problem is that this code is
> built using proprietary tools.  Although winfree86 is GPL'ed, it isn't a
> clean GPL.
>
> Why?  Well, integrating xfree into win32 cleanly is going involve COM
> objects.  AFAIK, gcc doesn't support COM (and the thought of doing COM in
> raw C is pretty revolting).

Relates the problem to the missing msvc c++ support of g++ ?

> Gcc wont work with MFC or ATL, and anyway both
> of those involve Microsoft licenses.  So that leaves a choice of using a
> Microsoft/Borland C compiler (do any other C compilers come with a MFC/ATL
> license?) or using a high-level language such as VB or Delphi.
>
> I've chosen Delphi because (a) I've got it and I'm comfortable with it; (b)
> it's a great prototyping language, and at this stage of winfree86's life I'm
> doing lots of prototyping.  The choice of delphi can and probably will
> change in the future, probably to C/ATL 'cause mfc is even more bloated than
> delphi. BTW, I considered c++ builder, but I rejected it (even though
> starting in C will make later migration lots easier) for two reasons: the
> version I've got (v3) has COM-related bugs which are very annoying; and
> starting in delphi will force a *complete* rewrite later, and I'm a great
> believer in Fred Brooks dictum of 'planning to throw one away'.
>
> OK, so what does winfree86 do?
>
> Firstly it is a *very* cut down version of cygwin + xfree.  The aim is to
> get its' size down to 3-4mb.  Actually, eventually there will probably be
> two versions of winfree86: a 'slim' version (3-4mb) which only provides an
> x-server; and a 'full' version (10-16mb) which provides xfree, xvnc,
> rdesktop (or tsc), telnet (and ssh) and tn3270.
>
> So, secondly, winfree86 is not limited to xfree.  It will provide other
> types of desktop connections. The idea is that the user has a folder of
> remote desktop objects.  These could be remote unices (x sever), win32
> (rdesktop/tsc), boxen (vnc), routers/appliances (telnet/ssh) or mainframes
> (tn3270).  A user can open the winfree86 folder, double-click on a remote
> system icon and go directly to the system.  They can create a remote desktop
> by being prompted through a wizard or dialog.  They don't have to worry
> about command line options, getting xfree and ssh working together, the
> differences between xfree and vnc etc.  It will all be dumbed-down and
> hidden from them.
>
> Winfree86 specifically aims to run multiple instances of xfree at the same
> time.  If the user wants to log onto two linux boxes, then they open two
> separate desktops.
>
> There are two user senarios I have in mind: sysadmins who have a who bunch
> of diverse systems to administer; and users who have an existing win32 boxes
> who need to access linux or mainframes.  Specifically, I'm interested in
> recycling win95/98 licenses and older hardware, with users accessing an
> office suite (using wordperfect) through linux.  It's an awful lot cheaper
> to put a high-end server running a 100-user license of wordperfect (about
> US$16k for the server hardware/software, using existing workstations)
> instead of 300 new licenses of Office/XP (about US$65k for software plus
> hardware costs).  This is the sort of senario which may well propel linux
> out onto 'desktops' (the actual workstation will run win32, but the
> application will run under linux).
>
> The whole idea is to have a drop in X product which can be deployed onto
> workstations, instead of having to license a commercial x-server such as
> Hummingbird, X-thin/Pro, X-Win32 or even MI/X.  The cost of the commercial
> x-server license kills the economics of having an office-suite server with
> win32 clients (the senario would still work with a linux thin-client, but
> most organisations are reluctant to move away from win32 on the desktop; got
> to get them to move one step at a time...).
>
> If you look at http://winfree86.sourceforge.net/images/screen.jpg, you can
> see a screenshot of winfree86.  It shows the winfree86 folder with two
> remote desktops (my two linux servers) with a connection to 'alan' open in
> the background.  The output from xfree has been intercepted (xfree runs as a
> child process of winfree86, which captures the output through a pipe) and is
> shown in a separate dialog box.  This is usually hidden and can be popped-up
> using an icon in the tool-tray.  Keen-eyed readers will notice that xwinclip
> has failed with 'Could not open display'.
>
> Functionally, this is as far as I've got.  I've been bogged down in pruning
> the file tree trying to get the size down to 3-4mb.  Testing this has been a
> bitch since it involves constant install/uninstall cycles.  I've got a
> Lenten Reborn card on order.  When it arrives life will be much easier :-)
>
> Rasjid Wilcox had a very similar idea to winfree86 named winxterm (see
> http://lasp.sourceforge.net/winxterm/ ).  He has already produced a minimal
> cygwin + xfree of about 4mb.  If we can integrate the two projects winfree86
> (or whatever its called) will be available much sooner.
>
> I hope I explained why winfree86 exists, and why it doesn't really fit into
> the existing xfree-cygwin project.
>
> cheers Matthew
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Christopher Faylor" <cgf@redhat.com>
> To: <cygwin-xfree@cygwin.com>
> Sent: Monday, November 19, 2001 5:37 AM
> Subject: Re: seperate xfree project on sourceforge
>
>
> > On Sun, Nov 18, 2001 at 07:58:13PM +1100, Matthew Donald wrote:
> > >I'm in the process of setting up winfree86.
> > >
> > >Winfree86 is a minimal version of Cygwin + xfree86 + other code to
> provide
> > >an x-server for Windows.  It removes the requirement to install a full
> > >version of Cygwin.  Also it pretties up the interface (removes the batch
> > >window, integrates the config more closely into Windows)
> >
> > That is no longer a requirement with cygwin's new version of setup.exe.
> >
> > We routinely ask for volunteers in the cygwin project and I'm sure that
> > the Cygwin XFree86 project would not turn help away.
> >
> > Why start up a separate effort?
> >
> > Did you have great ideas for cygwin's setup or for XFree86 that were
> > brutally shot down?  Or, did you decide that the only way to get things
> > done was to essentially fork both projects?
> >
> > cgf
> >
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Suhaib Siddiqi" <ssiddiqi@inspirepharm.com>
> To: <cygwin-xfree@cygwin.com>
> Sent: Monday, November 19, 2001 10:13 AM
> Subject: RE: seperate xfree project on sourceforge
>
>
> > I never heard anything about it?  I do not understand why a separate
> project
> > is needed?  Due to GPL requirements of Cygwin, your download site wont be
> > small.  You will need to host all the source codes.  My advice is join the
> > developers list at xgree86.cygwin.com and contribute directly to this
> > project.  Forking projects does more harm then good.
> >
> > Suhaib
>
>