Subject: FVWM 2.3 and Tru64 Unix 5.0

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 11:44:42 -0500 (EST)

I managed to build fvwm-2.3.10, and am now having the following problems.

1.  It seems to ignore my .fvwm2rc file.  Instead of my nice decorations, I
    get a dull looking motif-style screen with a root menu with four options:

	Xterm
	Setup form
	Issue FVWM commands
	Exit FVWM

    I run fvwm2 from my .xsession file as such:

	exec $HOME/bin/fvwm2 -cmd "FvwmM4 -m4-prefix -m4prog /usr/lar3ry/bin/m4 $HOME/.fvwm2rc"

    I know that the file is there, and if I switch back to fvwm 2.2 the
    same command line works.

2.  I play with this "mini root menu"

    - Xterm works  (nice!)

    - Setup form causes fvwm2 to hang.  A telnet into my system at this point
      shows that FvwmForm is running (although I have no form displaying on my
      screen).  Killing the FvwmForm module unfreezes fvwm.

    - Issue FVWM commands brings up a window, which quickly disappears.
      My session log file shows the following error messages:

[FVWM][HandleModuleInput]: <<ERROR>> Module 0, Size Problem: cont is zero
[FVWM][HandleModuleInput]: <<ERROR>> Module 0, Size Problem: cont is zero
[FVWM][HandleModuleInput]: <<ERROR>> Module 0, Size Problem: cont is zero

So... can anybody give me some clue as to how to get a .fvwm2rc that works
fine with 2.2.2 to work with 2.3.10?

I'm going back to 2.2.2 until I get some feedback.  I don't see anything in
the docs subdirectory or the README, NEWS, etc. that gives me a clue here.
Also, most of your docs imply that I'm using fvwm 2.2; you may wish to change
these.

-- 
Larry Gensch                                          [email-masked]

                  "May I have ten thousand marbles, please?"

--
Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL:http://www.fvwm.org/>.
To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm-workers" in the
body of a message to [email-masked].
To report problems, send mail to [email-masked]

---

From: Dan Espen <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 12:13:32 -0500

> [FVWM][HandleModuleInput]: <<ERROR>> Module 0, Size Problem: cont is zero

It looks like you don't have fvwm2 in your $PATH, and since you haven't
read your .fvwm2rc, you don't have ModulePath set either, so I'm guessing
that its running your old modules.  Do you have old modules somewhere in
your PATH?

The 2.2 version of FvwmForm will definitely have problems with the new
setup form.

I think this can also account for the M4 problems.

--
Dan Espen
444 Hoes Lane  Room RRC 1C-214           E-mail: [email-masked]
Piscataway, NJ 08854                     Phone: (732) 699-5570
--
Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL:http://www.fvwm.org/>.
To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm-workers" in the
body of a message to [email-masked].
To report problems, send mail to [email-masked]

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 14:31:24 -0500 (EST)

> The 2.2 version of FvwmForm will definitely have problems with the new

$HOME/bin/fvwm2 -version reports:

[FVWM][main]:  Fvwm Version 2.3.10 compiled on Dec 17 1999 at 10:50:46
[FVWM][main]:  with support for:  XPM

So, I know that I'm running the correct version.  I would imagine that the
following line should work in my .fvwm2rc:

ModulePath	FVWM_MODULEDIR:/usr/lar3ry/bin

(My $HOME is /usr/lar3ry, fyi, and /usr/lar3ry/bin is in my PATH.  I promise.)

> I think this can also account for the M4 problems.

How?  My .fvwm2rc file IS there.  It DOES get read by fvwm 2.2, but doesn't
seem to be read by fvwm 2.3.10.  There is an inconsistency.  Somthing worked
in 2.2 that doesn't work in 2.3.  I'm trying to find out what isn't working.

This is the procedure that I use to switch between 2.2 and 2.3:

	# To have fvwm 2.3 run:

	cd /usr/lar3ry/src/fvwm-2.3.10
	make install

	# To have fvwm 2.2 run:

	cd /usr/lar3ry/src/fvwm-2.2.2
	make install

Both were configured with --prefix=/usr/lar3ry, so the executable in both
cases is /usr/lar3ry/bin/fvwm2, and the program should be able to find FvwmM4
in the "proper" place, since it should be run out of wherever "make install"
puts it.

Or is this an incorrect assumption?

---

From: Brad Giaccio <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 14:41:29 -0500

On Fri, Dec 17, 1999 at 02:31:24PM -0500, [email-masked] wrote:

>       # To have fvwm 2.3 run:
>
>       cd /usr/lar3ry/src/fvwm-2.3.10 make install
>
>       # To have fvwm 2.2 run:
>
>       cd /usr/lar3ry/src/fvwm-2.2.2 make install
>
> Both were configured with --prefix=/usr/lar3ry, so the executable in
> both cases is /usr/lar3ry/bin/fvwm2, and the program should be able
> to find FvwmM4 in the "proper" place, since it should be run out of
> wherever "make install" puts it.
>

It is possibly an incorrect assumption. fvwm2 now builds in the
ModulPath when it gets compiled, however if you set it in your rc file
it will overload the compiled in path. Unless you say 
ModulePath <extra Modules>:+  
Where + expands the old value.
 
-- 
--- There are two kinds of knowledge, you either know the answer or
			you know where to find it
		      -Kane, Johnson, and anonymous
--
Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL:http://www.fvwm.org/>.
To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm-workers" in the
body of a message to [email-masked].
To report problems, send mail to [email-masked]

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 14:49:39 -0500 (EST)

> Where + expands the old value.

And what does FVWM_MODULEPATH expand to, then???

The ModulePath statement is, and I quote:

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 14:49:39 -0500 (EST)

---

From: Brad Giaccio <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 14:59:16 -0500

> ModulePath	FVWM_MODULEDIR:/usr/lar3ry/bin

My guess would be 
/usr/lar3ry/libexec/fvwm/2.3.12:/usr/lar3ry/bin

To check when you pop up and xterm from the menu.
echo $FVWM_MODULEDIR

---

From: Dan Espen <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 15:06:01 -0500

> > And what does FVWM_MODULEPATH expand to, then???
                             ^^^^
Typo?

> > ModulePath	FVWM_MODULEDIR:/usr/lar3ry/bin
               ^

Needs a dollar sign.

---

From: Dan Espen <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 15:09:01 -0500

> [FVWM][main]:  with support for:  XPM

I was concerned about the version of FvwmForm you were running.
For some reason I thought fvwm might use $PATH as a fallback, but I
think I was on the wrong track.

> in 2.2 that doesn't work in 2.3.  I'm trying to find out what isn't working.

M4 is a module.  If you are getting bad module versions, (old ones),
then that might explain why your .fvwm2rc doesn't work.

Uh, just realized that you are using M4, I guess you wouldn't need a dollar
sign after all.  Still, I think you might be running the wrong module
versions.

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 10:03:51 -0500 (EST)

> then that might explain why your .fvwm2rc doesn't work.

Well, I found that the .fvwm2rc file was being properly interpreted by FvwmM4
(I found copies in /tmp), so for the time being, I have taken this preprossed
output and am using THAT as a start.  This allows me to get past the "silly
four line menu" thing.  Once I get the RC file correct, I'll debug the problem
with fvwm2.3 and M4.

Next problem:

fvwm2.3 starts up, and hangs.

I telnet into my workstation, and find that I have a FvwmBanner and
FvwmButtons process running.

I kill them, one at a time, and fvwm2 continues its initialization.

I note that the command line being executed shows that these modules are being
run out of /usr/lar3ry/libexec/fvwm/2.3.10, so this is not a case of running
the wrong modules.

Error message(s) in the log file shows repeated messages like:

[FVWM][DrawButton]: <<ERROR>> unknown button type
[FVWM][HandleModuleInput]: <<ERROR>> Module 1, Size Problem: cont is zero

Next problem:  No modules seem to work.  Not FvwmPager, not FvwmButtons,not
FvwmForm.  Nothing. Except for tkgoodstuff, which occasionally has fvwm2
generating messages due to the fact that the module protocol has been
modified.  (tkgoodstuff was built outside the fvwm2.3 sources, obviously.)

Yet another problem:

My .fvwm2rc decors, which looked nice in fvwm2.2 look horrible.  My ActiveUp
window color should be DarkBlue with white fonts.  It's a light gray with
white fonts.  (I have a display of depth 16; I seriously doubt that I'm
running out of colors.)

I'll be investigating this further.

>From the look of things, it looks like going from fvwm2.2 to 2.4 is not going
to be a "simple upgrade" for most people; if their 2.2 RC files won't work
unmodified in 2.4, there is going to be problems.  Maybe somebody can come up
with a perl script to do conversions?  Or maybe somebody should up the version
number to 3.x to indicate some incompatible changes.

I'll report with more information as I get it.