HP-UX 10.10

[vrushali shinde]

How could I get source code for HP-UX 10.10?

[Pete Randall]

Get hired by HP?


Pete

[Torsten.]

All of hp-ux is closed source, except ported open source parts.

[Laurent Menase]

Indeed no chance. Access to hpux source need very special agreements, and never for free.

What are you trying to do?

[vrushali shinde]

I wanted to take a look at SMT implementation done in x11 10.10, which is not there in open release latest version 7.4. Can I get source code for SMT module of X11 10.10?

[Dennis Handly]

This is long obsoleted and may not even be available to anyone.

[vrushali shinde]

Thank you for the quick response. I checked the performance comparision between SMT by HP and SGI at http://dri.freedesktop.org/wiki/SharedMemoryTransport#head-4fa166e88889bea15ec28aeecf613fb04213d510
It seems that SMT increases performance by 5 to 20%, also degrades in some cases.
Could you please let me know why was the SMT obsoleted, was it because of not much performance improvement? Could I get some information/ docs about how SMT was implemented?

[OldSchool]

1) 10.10 is almost a decade out of support

2) In the article cited at the link, Shared Memory Transport is noted a used by the XWindow system. I believe the X implemention shipped w/ HPUX is based on the one supplied by The Open Group (and not the XFree86 implementation noted in the article)

3) I don't know if the current Open Group implementation uses STM or not (nor do I really care). The Open Group continues to maintain a website, so the information about their implementation may be available there.

The article does note the following:

"On workstations, SMT has historically provided a significant improvement in performance.....on modern PC-class hardware, SMT improves overall performance by less than 10%......I do not recommend devoting more engineering time to the active improvement of the current SMT implementation for XFree86"

however, as noted, this doesn't specifically apply to the implementation shipped with HP.