Hi there,

  A follow-up of FLTK2-based Dillo for Debian installer.

-- 
  Cheers
  Jorge.-
Jorge Arellano Cid wrote:
> Hi Michael,
> 
>   I  just received this request in our mailing list.
The keypoint
> is  how near/far is FLTK2 from having DirectFB
rendering support.
> If  some  Debian  developers  help  with  the  task, 
what's your
> estimation?

No work has been done.

That said, I believe Cairo offers DirectFB support, and FLTK
2 can
use Cairo (and probably will depend on it in the future), so
I think
it won't take a whole lot to add the DirectFB glue that is
needed.

The best place for the Debian folks to go is fltk.org and
post to
the fltk.development forum.  I personally am too busy right
now to
do anything with FLTK... :(

-- 
____________________________________________________________
__________
Michael Sweet, Easy Software Products           mike at
easysw dot com
Internet Printing and Document Software          http://www.easysw.com


_______________________________________________
Dillo-dev mailing list
Dillo-devdillo.org
http://lists.auriga.wearlab.de/cgi-bin/mailman/
listinfo/dillo-dev

<snip>

> Jorge Arellano Cid wrote:
> 
>> Hi Michael,
>>
>>   I  just received this request in our mailing
list. The keypoint
>> is  how near/far is FLTK2 from having DirectFB
rendering support.
>> If  some  Debian  developers  help  with  the 
task,  what's your
>> estimation?
> 
> 
> No work has been done.
> 
> That said, I believe Cairo offers DirectFB support, and
FLTK 2 can
> use Cairo (and probably will depend on it in the
future), so I think
> it won't take a whole lot to add the DirectFB glue
that is needed.
> 
> The best place for the Debian folks to go is fltk.org
and post to
> the fltk.development forum.  I personally am too busy
right now to
> do anything with FLTK... :(

Hi

I know a little about FLTK as, while developing the GTK
frontend to the 
debian-installer, i also investigated about using
FLTK+KDrive instead of 
GTK+DFB (i eventually preferred GTKDFB as the d-i components
are written 
in plain ANSI C and some GTK code and GTKDFB packages
already existed).
Unfortunately, i don't know FLTK or DFB well enough to
write a DFB 
backend: anyway, cairo has a DFB backend, written by the
actual 
maintainer of GTK's DFB backend, Mike Emmel.
My interest for Dillo being ported to GTK+ is that the d-i
has to be 
kept as small as possible (currently the miniiso is ~9 megs,
including 
intl fonts) and apps inside it should need no unmet
dependencies (and 
dillo depends on GTK only, which is already packaged in its
DFB version).
Yesterday i started porting Dillo to GTK+ but it seems now
clear to me 
that dillo is definitely moving away from GTK in favour of
FLTK and 
there is no going back, right?
So, i guess it makes little sense porting Dillo to GTK+, as
this would 
only generate, in the best case just an non-mainline fork
used in the 
d-i only, right? :(

friendly

Attilio

_______________________________________________
Dillo-dev mailing list
Dillo-devdillo.org
http://lists.auriga.wearlab.de/cgi-bin/mailman/
listinfo/dillo-dev

On Tue, Mar 21, 2006 at 06:19:56PM +0100, Attilio Fiandrotti
wrote:
> 
> <snip>
> 
> >Jorge Arellano Cid wrote:
> >
> >>Hi Michael,
> >>
> >>  I  just received this request in our mailing
list. The keypoint
> >>is  how near/far is FLTK2 from having DirectFB
rendering support.
> >>If  some  Debian  developers  help  with  the 
task,  what's your
> >>estimation?
> >
> >
> >No work has been done.
> >
> >That said, I believe Cairo offers DirectFB support,
and FLTK 2 can
> >use Cairo (and probably will depend on it in the
future), so I think
> >it won't take a whole lot to add the DirectFB glue
that is needed.
> >
> >The best place for the Debian folks to go is
fltk.org and post to
> >the fltk.development forum.  I personally am too
busy right now to
> >do anything with FLTK... :(
> 
> Hi
> 
> I know a little about FLTK as, while developing the GTK
frontend to the 
> debian-installer, i also investigated about using
FLTK+KDrive instead of 
> GTK+DFB (i eventually preferred GTKDFB as the d-i
components are written 
> in plain ANSI C and some GTK code and GTKDFB packages
already existed).
> Unfortunately, i don't know FLTK or DFB well enough to
write a DFB 
> backend: anyway, cairo has a DFB backend, written by
the actual 
> maintainer of GTK's DFB backend, Mike Emmel.
> My interest for Dillo being ported to GTK+ is that the
d-i has to be 
> kept as small as possible (currently the miniiso is ~9
megs, including 
> intl fonts) and apps inside it should need no unmet
dependencies (and 
> dillo depends on GTK only, which is already packaged in
its DFB version).
> Yesterday i started porting Dillo to GTK+ but it seems
now clear to me 
> that dillo is definitely moving away from GTK in favour
of FLTK and 
> there is no going back, right?

  Right, but the overhead of statically linking FLTK2 is
near 300KB.
Not a show stopper at all.

> So, i guess it makes little sense porting Dillo to
GTK+, as this would 
> only generate, in the best case just an non-mainline
fork used in the 
> d-i only, right? :(

  Right.

  Really, the statically linked FLTK2 binary is a good
solution.


  Note:  Michael was kind enough to answer me quickly, but
please
don't  CC'  him as he has no time currently to work on
this. Bill
and Dejan are in the FLTK devel forum.

-- 
  Cheers
  Jorge.-

_______________________________________________
Dillo-dev mailing list
Dillo-devdillo.org
http://lists.auriga.wearlab.de/cgi-bin/mailman/
listinfo/dillo-dev