nanogui: re:
Subject:
re:
From:
Alexander Peuchert ####@####.####
Date:
11 May 1999 07:20:52 -0000
Message-Id: <Pine.GSO.4.02.9905110911120.24754-100000@rumburak>
Hi Greg,
it really looks good, how the Nano-X improves. And it's really cool to
see someone hacking enthusiasticly like you ... 8-)
Just my two cents:
As this thing is called Nano-X, it should stay nano. If you can keep up
with a modular approach, this is okay, but please don't include features
that aren't removable afterwards.
The windowmanager should be modular, too. For example one windowmanager
for big displays with borders and titlebars, and one windowmanager for
PDAs, where only one window stays in front.
In about 2 weeks I gonna start to do a toolkit upon this little thingy,
except someone else has already started one ... ?
- alex
On Mon, 10 May 1999, Greg Haerr wrote:
> I completely agree with setting up the frame buffer device. It's a pain in the ass.
>
> I am looking for someone to write an svgalib driver for nanoX, now that it's
> easy to add drivers. This will allow nanoX to run on all those millions of Linux
> systems that are still running < 2.2 kernels... svgalib also supports mice.
>
> I've got a long list of features too. But nanoX is still **very** primitive. I am
> going to be writing a window manager soon, but I have some big API issues
> that need to be discussed.
>
> Currently, I am concentrating on getting nanoX so that it can be readily
> customized for multiple operating systems, with drivers easily added.
> The upper level api work will be next, as that gets into how we'll integrate a window
> manager, and what the look-and-feel should be like.
>
> I've been on an extreme coding binge, with no stopping yet planned...
>
> Greg
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ####@####.####
> For additional commands, e-mail: ####@####.####
>
Alexander Peuchert
####@####.####
http://www.peuchert.de ( not very interesting yet ;-) )
