nanogui: source tree
Subject:
Re: source tree
From:
Chris Ross ####@####.####
Date:
15 Dec 1999 13:50:08 -0000
Message-Id: <Pine.LNX.4.10.9912151342150.22749-100000@vortex.ukshells.co.uk>
i agree with that but the point of changing the api
isn't to criupple it's size really to make it more flexible
in the long run. as things like a psion dont really
want alot of x stuff - just small apps, but if we are
running nanox on something with a little more kick to it
then beefier apps may be wanted...
chris
======================================================
| Chris Ross ( Boris` ) ####@####.#### |
| http://www.darkrock.co.uk |
`----------------------------------------------------'
On Wed, 15 Dec 1999, Alan Cox wrote:
> > i personally think it's necessary to make is source compatible
> > so that we can take apps from x and recompile them. that way
> > we can almost instantly clobber the apps issue and toolkit
> > issue in one fell swoop. we can also design it such that it can
> > be compile with only the necessary chunk that are required.
> > ie if atoms andhints aren't required then dont compile them in.
>
> Most X applications are too big to fit a typical nanogui environment.
> A gdk/gtk toolkit port for nanogui with gnome on top does make sense but thats
> for a different reason - gnome apps tend to be small but have a _lot_ of
> shared libraries. For an embedded system with a fair number of loadable
> apps (eg the palmpilot) you want as much shared toolkit in the base system
> rom as possible to keep app size low
>
> Alan
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ####@####.####
> For additional commands, e-mail: ####@####.####
>
>
