cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

HP-UX 10.10

 
vrushali shinde
Occasional Visitor

HP-UX 10.10

How could I get source code for HP-UX 10.10?
7 REPLIES
Pete Randall
Outstanding Contributor

Re: HP-UX 10.10

Get hired by HP?


Pete

Pete
Torsten.
Acclaimed Contributor

Re: HP-UX 10.10

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

Hope this helps!
Regards
Torsten.

__________________________________________________
There are only 10 types of people in the world -
those who understand binary, and those who don't.

__________________________________________________
No support by private messages. Please ask the forum!

If you feel this was helpful please click the KUDOS! thumb below!   
Laurent Menase
Honored Contributor

Re: HP-UX 10.10

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

What are you trying to do?
vrushali shinde
Occasional Visitor

Re: HP-UX 10.10

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?

Re: HP-UX 10.10

This is long obsoleted and may not even be available to anyone.
vrushali shinde
Occasional Visitor

Re: HP-UX 10.10

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
Honored Contributor

Re: HP-UX 10.10

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.