RE: Multiple XWin.exe programs loading and no xterm

[Alexander Gottwald <alexander dot gottwald at s1999 dot tu-chemnitz dot de>]

On Thu, 7 Apr 2005, Phil Betts wrote:

> I'll bow to your superior knowledge, it's about 10 years since I last
> used startx in anger, and that was on Linux, where the X servers only
> exit on closedown.  However (I'm just speculating here) the problems I
> was having with xhost/xmodmap were partly that the client programs
> "thought" they had executed correctly (i.e. no errors were raised and
> the return code was zero).  Is it possible that xinit similarly thinks
> all is well?

I don't think so. 
 
> Reading between your lines, I assume you're saying that XWin is a
> regular Windows program, and it's all down to the way that WinMain is
> called.
> 
> On Unixen, one would initialise first and then fork, to detach the
> server (or, more likely, leave it to the shell to place the server in
> the background), but I guess this is not practicable in a Windows
> environment.

Nothing forks except bash (or cmd or whatever) The xserver on unix does not 
put itself to background. It starts, accepts connections and exits sometime.
Putting it in the background is exactly done by bash on "Xorg &" or by cmd.exe
on "start XWin".

I start XWin with a single shortcut. And clients later as I need them. Putting
the xterm in the startup script is just for convenience and for preventing 
silly postings "I started startxwin.bat and there is nothing happening". Now
people at least see a window. But then they complained "Calling startxwin.bat 
twice pops up an error message stating I started the xserver twice". This is
just the third problem with a feature I consider completly useless. Maybe I 
should remove it and point the poeple to the users guide instead. 

> I'm happy with my hack for now, so I'm certainly not pushing for a
> change.
> 
> Feel free to incorporate it into the distributed startxwin.bat if you
> want, although if you do, you may need to change the server to output
> a key phrase (e.g. "XWin Initialisation Complete") that is always
> output regardless of how it was started, instead of my more ad-hoc
> approach.

Sorry. I won't make any move towards adding a hack into the startup scripts.
First thing people should do is fix their systems and remove the crappy zone
alarm and symantec antivirus programs. They cause the problems (at least they
did in all other cases which were reported over the last months). If someone
does not want to remove them, they should start debugging cygwin.dll and find
a solution to let the process startup work properly even with zone alarm in
place. Something I don't have time for.

bye
	ago
-- 
 Alexander.Gottwald@s1999.tu-chemnitz.de 
 http://www.gotti.org           ICQ: 126018723