nanogui: Thread: Re: [linuxce-devel] Browser...


[<<] [<] Page 1 of 1 [>] [>>]
Subject: RE: [linuxce-devel] Browser...
From: "Darran D. Rimron" ####@####.####
Date: 1 Mar 2000 17:24:25 -0000
Message-Id: <NCBBLCEDENCINNMFNPBCMEIGEGAA.darran@rimron.co.uk>

{cross posted to relevent person and the NanoGUI list]

> -----Original Message-----
> I think a more direct C/C++ implementation would be
> a better way to go.  Especially when some of the ports
> are targeting low 2-4MB memory machines.  As much as I
> hate to admit it, Pocket IE rocks on my 2Meg SH3 40MHz.

IIRC, there was a Opera port in progress using MWIN/NanoGUI -- but I
don't know if they plan to cover LinuxCE too.

	-Darran

Subject: Re: [linuxce-devel] Browser...
From: "The Joker" ####@####.####
Date: 1 Mar 2000 21:20:07 -0000
Message-Id: <049101bf83c2$c2f08560$f5089fc3@joker.crusaders.no>

>> I think a more direct C/C++ implementation would be
>> a better way to go.  Especially when some of the ports
>> are targeting low 2-4MB memory machines.  As much as I
>> hate to admit it, Pocket IE rocks on my 2Meg SH3 40MHz.
>
>IIRC, there was a Opera port in progress using MWIN/NanoGUI -- but I
>don't know if they plan to cover LinuxCE too.



If we had a LinuxCE computer around, I can't see why this shouldn't be
possible. Both opera and nano-X are so portable that it would be little
painful to manage this.  Of course, I would have to make sure this first
version get 100% completed first.  I will put a lot of effort in it the next
following weeks, and it will be finished soon. Thanks to Morten, it looks
REALLY nice :)

-Richard

Subject: Re: [linuxce-devel] Browser...
From: "Greg Haerr" ####@####.####
Date: 2 Mar 2000 06:18:53 -0000
Message-Id: <020001bf840d$70562bc0$15320cd0@gregh>

: If we had a LinuxCE computer around, I can't see why this shouldn't be
: possible. Both opera and nano-X are so portable that it would be little
: painful to manage this. 

As I mentioned on one of the lists, there's no difference between Nano-X
on Linux and LinuxCE, both use the kernel framebuffer.

 Of course, I would have to make sure this first
: version get 100% completed first.  I will put a lot of effort in it the next
: following weeks, and it will be finished soon. Thanks to Morten, it looks
: REALLY nice :)

BTW, are you using the 16bpp alpha blend stuff and the anti-aliased fonts?

Regards,

Greg


Subject: Re: [linuxce-devel] Browser...
From: Richard Kvalsvik ####@####.####
Date: 2 Mar 2000 10:57:30 -0000
Message-Id: <38BE45FD.82831EA1@crusaders.no>

> As I mentioned on one of the lists, there's no difference between Nano-X
> on Linux and LinuxCE, both use the kernel framebuffer.

Then it all remains on adjusting for that kernel, can't see why it
shouldn't work.

> BTW, are you using the 16bpp alpha blend stuff and the anti-aliased fonts?

At this moment, the fonts are not implemented, but soon it will be.
It is neccesary for a proper browser to work as it really should.

-- 
Richard Kvalsvik
-Developer at Opera Software
[<<] [<] Page 1 of 1 [>] [>>]


Powered by ezmlm-browse 0.20.