nanogui: Thread: nanoGUI GTK Port?

Hi,

Is anyone working on a port of GTK to nanoGUI?  Would it be smarter to
make an Xlib interface for nanoGUI, or just port gdk directly to the
nanoGUI/Microwindows API?  (I'm attempting the latter)



Steven
####@####.####
[ Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of my employers. ]

> make an Xlib interface for nanoGUI, or just port gdk directly to the
> nanoGUI/Microwindows API?  (I'm attempting the latter)

Porting gdk is the right thing in theory

Best of luck 

: > make an Xlib interface for nanoGUI, or just port gdk directly to the
: > nanoGUI/Microwindows API?  (I'm attempting the latter)
: 
: Porting gdk is the right thing in theory

I agree.  It's more work than it's worth to build a full Xlib interface
for nanogui, only to then try to get gdk running, which would differ
anyway since we'd never want to exactly imitate X's huge color
model, for instance.  Much better to start hacking gdk in.

Please keep me posted as to which routines aren't there at all,
when looking in from the gdk perspective....

Regards,

Greg

On Tue, 11 Jan 2000, Greg Haerr wrote:

> 
> : > make an Xlib interface for nanoGUI, or just port gdk directly to the
> : > nanoGUI/Microwindows API?  (I'm attempting the latter)
> : 
> : Porting gdk is the right thing in theory

Well , it should use as little disk space as possible , because on my
Linux Box they weight around 7Mb and it would be too big for a LinuxCe
device.

Damien

: > : > make an Xlib interface for nanoGUI, or just port gdk directly to the
: > : > nanoGUI/Microwindows API?  (I'm attempting the latter)
: > : 
: > : Porting gdk is the right thing in theory
: 
: Well , it should use as little disk space as possible , because on my
: Linux Box they weight around 7Mb and it would be too big for a LinuxCe
: device.

Microwindows/Nano-X footprint is around 60k, with no images or fonts
linked in.  I don't think Gdk is that large.  Yes, GTK is quite a bit bigger

Greg