nanogui: Small Xlib replacement
Subject:
RE: Small Xlib replacement
From:
Alex Holden ####@####.####
Date:
8 Sep 1999 17:39:15 -0000
Message-Id: <Pine.LNX.4.04.9909081831040.23796-100000@www.linuxhacker.org>
On Wed, 8 Sep 1999, Greg Haerr wrote:
> Ah, finally, the need becomes clear: if the nanoGUI api were
> Xlib, then there isn't much of a porting issue at all. Otherwise it becomes
> one of dozens of graphical systems apis out there that few use...
> And what do you know, nanoX is damn near Xlib now. (I still hold
> my 90% is accurate)
Not only would making something close to X11R6 compliant necessitate
adding significant complexity to the server, there's the additional
problem of people who will incorrectly assume that it is supposed to be
fully X compliant and complain when they find they can't compile an
unpatched GTK+ against it or something. Things like the X11 font, colour,
Window manager, and input models really don't want to go into something
intended to be a palmtop, and things that we do want to have like the
handwriting recognition extensions we talked about don't directly fit into
the X11 model. I don't see any problem with simply changing the names
and, where possible, parameters of the API to match the X11 model; in fact
you may as well simply create a new version of the client lib with the
different names in it, but it still won't give you anywhere near a full
X11 implementation.
--------------- Linux- the choice of a GNU generation. --------------
: Alex Holden (M1CJD)- Caver, Programmer, Land Rover nut, Radio Ham :
-------------------- http://www.linuxhacker.org/ --------------------
