[<<] [<] Page 2 of 6 [>] [>>] | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Subject:
Re: nanogui widget set
From: Lajber Zoltan ####@####.#### Date: 11 Jun 1999 21:30:45 -0000 Message-Id: <Pine.LNX.4.02.9906112319430.8455-100000@lajli.gau.hu> Well, I have no contact with any fltk developpers, I just used it sometimes. On Fri, 11 Jun 1999, Lalo Martins wrote: > IMHO, besides being small, one very important thing we need to > look at is application availability OR programming ease. Fltk has some application already. Not too much, but for example, a window manager exist. > And the "very small" widget set should probably be easy to code > for; people don't want to spend weeks coding something this > specialized, IMHO. Well, the few hundred k size of the fltk not a problem. I going to use it for embedded systems, but even a 2M flash boot device is enought for the linux kernel, the nano-X, fltk and the application. Yes, sometimes the 2M flahs is overkill in embedded, but I think on the very small systems, where the size realy matter, there is no real operating system at all. So, which version of nano-X is recomended to try out with fltk? I have the 0.4, do I need newest? Bye, -=Lajbi=-------------------------------------------------------------------- LAJBER Zoltan ####@####.#### http://jht.gau.hu/~lajbi GAU Dept. of Vehicles and Thermal Tech. http://jht.gau.hu A member of HuLUG http://mlf.linux.rulez.org/mlf/ | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Subject:
RE: nanogui widget set
From: Greg Haerr ####@####.#### Date: 11 Jun 1999 21:53:37 -0000 Message-Id: <01BEB421.104E7410.greg@censoft.com> : So, which version of nano-X is recomended to try out with fltk? : I have the 0.4, do I need newest? : My last submission was 0.4, which completely works. Alex Holden has been working on some things, and introduced a pre-release numbering system. You'll have to check with him to see what versions work and don't work. Greg | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Subject:
Re: nanogui widget set
From: Alan Cox ####@####.#### Date: 11 Jun 1999 22:10:02 -0000 Message-Id: <E10sZP0-0003d8-00@the-village.bc.nu> > Is it hard to port an already working widget set? > I looked on fltk, it's not big, has a very good gui designer and I just > liked it for X. isnt fltk C++. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Subject:
RE: nanogui widget set
From: Greg Haerr ####@####.#### Date: 11 Jun 1999 22:13:56 -0000 Message-Id: <01BEB423.D81A7460.greg@censoft.com> On Friday, June 11, 1999 4:04 PM, Alan Cox ####@####.#### wrote: : > Is it hard to port an already working widget set? : > I looked on fltk, it's not big, has a very good gui designer and I just : > liked it for X. : : isnt fltk C++. : I just looked at it, and it appears it is, but it is implemented on top of win32 or Xlib. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Subject:
Re: nanogui widget set
From: Lajber Zoltan ####@####.#### Date: 11 Jun 1999 22:16:42 -0000 Message-Id: <Pine.LNX.4.02.9906120010520.8455-100000@lajli.gau.hu> On Fri, 11 Jun 1999, Alan Cox wrote: > > Is it hard to port an already working widget set? > > I looked on fltk, it's not big, has a very good gui designer and I just > > liked it for X. > > isnt fltk C++. It is. Why, it's a problem? Bye, -=Lajbi=-------------------------------------------------------------------- LAJBER Zoltan ####@####.#### http://jht.gau.hu/~lajbi GATE Jarmu- es Hotechnika Tanszek http://jht.gau.hu A member of HuLUG http://mlf.linux.rulez.org/mlf | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Subject:
Re: nanogui widget set
From: Alan Cox ####@####.#### Date: 11 Jun 1999 22:17:03 -0000 Message-Id: <E10sZVq-0003eq-00@the-village.bc.nu> > Well, fltk is _relatively_ small and simple. The lib is around 500k. It > run on X, OpenGL, and win32 api. I really really worry about the "500K is small and simple" folks. This is meant to be a small GUI. Think "50K is large" please | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Subject:
Re: nanogui widget set
From: Alan Cox ####@####.#### Date: 11 Jun 1999 22:25:28 -0000 Message-Id: <E10sZdP-0003ff-00@the-village.bc.nu> > On Friday, June 11, 1999 4:04 PM, Alan Cox ####@####.#### wrote: > : > Is it hard to port an already working widget set? > : > I looked on fltk, it's not big, has a very good gui designer and I just > : > liked it for X. > : > : isnt fltk C++. > : > I just looked at it, and it appears it is, but it is implemented on top of win32 or > Xlib. Ok, that means while its a fine nanogui candidate its not useful for the ELKS side of things (elks barely has ansi C let alone C++) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Subject:
RE: nanogui widget set
From: Greg Haerr ####@####.#### Date: 11 Jun 1999 22:27:59 -0000 Message-Id: <01BEB425.D634D990.greg@censoft.com> On Friday, June 11, 1999 4:11 PM, Alan Cox ####@####.#### wrote: : > Well, fltk is _relatively_ small and simple. The lib is around 500k. It : > run on X, OpenGL, and win32 api. : : I really really worry about the "500K is small and simple" folks. This is : meant to be a small GUI. Think "50K is large" please : : I completely agree. As an aside, a little joke: so there I was, hacking micro-windows in the middle of the night, adding the required features to do anything useful, always worrying about how this thing needs to run in 64k+64k, and then I'm done with 256 color bitmaps, so I need to test. So I convert and load up my favorite picture, a Ferrari, and compile and link it into micro-win. It works! I "size" the executable, and find that the program is *still* about 57K, except that the data segment is now 84K! 82K of it is my Ferrari picture... (this seemed funny at 2am, maybe it loses a little now that I'm fully awake...) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Subject:
Re: nanogui widget set
From: Alan Cox ####@####.#### Date: 11 Jun 1999 22:30:06 -0000 Message-Id: <E10sZhn-0003gO-00@the-village.bc.nu> > So I convert and load up my favorite picture, a Ferrari, and compile and > link it into micro-win. It works! I "size" the executable, and find that > the program is *still* about 57K, except that the data segment is now > 84K! 82K of it is my Ferrari picture... (this seemed funny at 2am, maybe > it loses a little now that I'm fully awake...) So you load it in stripes from the disk. The scary thing is it can't be that long ago this was how you did images. I remember doing stuff with images in tiles on disk and keeping offsets to each tile. Now my desktop PC video card has as much memory as my mailserver Alan | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Subject:
Re: nanogui widget set
From: Lajber Zoltan ####@####.#### Date: 11 Jun 1999 22:48:00 -0000 Message-Id: <Pine.LNX.4.02.9906120021190.8455-100000@lajli.gau.hu> On Fri, 11 Jun 1999, Alan Cox wrote: > > Well, fltk is _relatively_ small and simple. The lib is around 500k. It > > run on X, OpenGL, and win32 api. > > I really really worry about the "500K is small and simple" folks. This is > meant to be a small GUI. Think "50K is large" please In this case we need to write one. The "W widget set" is about this size, but it's ugly isn't? Bye the way, before we do something, what is the requirements for this widget set? I'm new on this, so please tell me some, if decided already. We need buttons (normal, radio, check, light, image), menus, edit (single and multi line) and list controls. A combo with list/edit. Any more? On what platforms? It determine the size of the avaiable boot device, the size of memory, and even the programming language. I need Linux on strongARM, PPC, maybe alpha, not decided yet The boot device is from 2M, ram is in 16-32M. I think the m68k is interesting too, but not the ELKS, becouse it stick to x86. It looks like Lalo Martins sayd: one extremly small and one with comparable with desktop widget sets. For me, the main restriction is not the RAM size, but the boot device size. What is your aim: 1M with kernel and nanoX+widget? Alain, for an extremly small, the gpm driver is not suitable, imho. Bye, -=Lajbi=-------------------------------------------------------------------- LAJBER Zoltan ####@####.#### http://jht.gau.hu/~lajbi GATE Jarmu- es Hotechnika Tanszek http://jht.gau.hu A member of HuLUG http://mlf.linux.rulez.org/mlf | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
[<<] [<] Page 2 of 6 [>] [>>] |