NeXtaw as 1st tier BSD x11-toolkit port



Reaction score: 907
Messages: 1,856

The BSD's lack a native gui toolkit. I was looking into taking an existing one, and slowly learning about it to take the steps to make it a reasonable first class toolkit for BSD's

Of the Xaw implementations, NeXtaw is the best looking one, and it's acceptable in appearance. It's comparable to ISC's Motif which became LGPL. NeXtaw's license fits with BSD's perfectly as well.

I'll work on adding options NeXtaw options to programs that use Xaw, this may take a while. Thread want-to-add-nextaw-options-to-xaw-ports-x11-toolkits.82326. About Xaw, and screenshots for comparison: Thread athena-xaw-implementations.81588.

Then, I'll work on porting NeXtaw to XCB, even if only partially through XCL. Thread xcb-x-c-binding.81694.

Before, I considered that there was a way that makes a program implementation BSD-like. Actually, it a lot has to do with about portability the UNIX way, more than BSD specific compatibility. That a program work on top of base applications or types of program that could eventually find their way into base, instead of an alternate in ports is additionally a means of programs tailored for being tailored for BSD.

Cmake dependencies are also portable, but they're additionally Windows portable. Instead of programs being made tailored upstream for BSD use, it's better for the persuasion to be for portability. Is SystemD made for portability, or for absorbing and integrating into superficial complexities? Palemoon developers want their flagship program to have its own unique set of dependencies, rather than be portable. Some programs or software suites aren't leaned towards portability. Fortunately, the applications I want to work on are already portable enough to need less patches for use on FreeBSD. The Unix portability test would be, if it builds with bmake or imake.