nanogui: Thread: resolution and color depth?

Hello,

I am just now starting on an embedded linux project that needs to drive a
video with 1024x768 resolution and a minimum color depth of 16 bpp. I've
poke around a little with the nanoGUI and have a few questions.

1) Does nanoGUI support a resolution greater than 640x480?

2) It appears that 16 bpp is supported as long as the correct fb device is
used. Is this correct?

3) Is there currently support for processing jpeg files? I assume there is
since Greg's latest message describes the web browser. Where would these
utilities be found?

4) I'm a little concerned with speed. The application is fairly simple, but
does need to drive full screen video. The last version of nanogui I used did
not have bitblit. I would think that drawing is much faster with this
enhancement.

I'm more than willing to help code, test, etc. on any part of the project
where I can help. I have many years of C and Unix experience, but lack
knowledge of how computer graphics work. So, I just need a little direction
to start with. Any help is greatly appreciated.

Kyle Harris
####@####.####

: 1) Does nanoGUI support a resolution greater than 640x480?
: 
It will support any resolution.  The driver layer tells the engine how
big the screen is.  Currently, the fb driver reads that info from the kernel,
so it'll come up with whatever the kernel thinks the fb is.



: 2) It appears that 16 bpp is supported as long as the correct fb device is
: used. Is this correct?

	We support truecolor 16bpp using 5/6/5 packing.  A 5/5/5 packing
would require a trivial source mod.  Again, this is read from the fb device
for the fb screen driver.




: 
: 3) Is there currently support for processing jpeg files? I assume there is
: since Greg's latest message describes the web browser. Where would these
: utilities be found?

Opera's web browser isn't open source.  But the jpeg libraries are.  I've
got considerable experience with the jpeg library, but haven't brought
that into the project yet.  Currently, there's a simple internal color bitmap
format that you could use the jpeg library to read jpegs and write to.


: 
: 4) I'm a little concerned with speed. The application is fairly simple, but
: does need to drive full screen video. The last version of nanogui I used did
: not have bitblit. I would think that drawing is much faster with this
: enhancement.

Bitblit is currently working only for the Microwindows api, not the Nano-X api.
I would suggest using the linked application client/server mode for speed,
you don't want to send video over a unix socket, I don't think.  
I suggest you get into it a bit, figure which api you want to use, and let me
know what items need speeding up.



: 
: I'm more than willing to help code, test, etc. on any part of the project
: where I can help. I have many years of C and Unix experience, but lack
: knowledge of how computer graphics work. So, I just need a little direction
: to start with. Any help is greatly appreciated.

Part of the point of Microwindows is to teach a simple but very effective
graphics implementation.  Read all of mwin/src/dev*.c files and the architecture
document.  You should be able to pick it up fairly quickly, it's fun.

Greg

>1) Does nanoGUI support a resolution greater than 640x480?


Absolutely.. Opera Web-browser was initially developed at 1280x1024


>3) Is there currently support for processing jpeg files? I assume there is
>since Greg's latest message describes the web browser. Where would these
>utilities be found?


That one have we made ourself.
I belive I saw something on www.neutralzone.org/home/faqsys  though.


>4) I'm a little concerned with speed. The application is fairly simple, but
>does need to drive full screen video. The last version of nanogui I used
did
>not have bitblit. I would think that drawing is much faster with this
>enhancement.


right now, displaying images goes fairly fast if you hack a little. I had to
research
a little on unusual solutions when I needed to display images on the 8-bit
screeen
without knowing the palette. I think it looks really nice now though =)

 What you need for a highspeed video-stream to work is
a) double buffering to avoid flicker
b) bitblit to make it go speedy.

as far as I know, these two API calls are available really soon
What speed you get, Greg is the only one that know I think.


-Richard

> >1) Does nanoGUI support a resolution greater than 640x480?
>
>
> Absolutely.. Opera Web-browser was initially developed at 1280x1024
>
>
Was nanogui running on a framebuffer for this application? If so, which one?
Does the browser use Nano-X or Microwindows API (or something else)?

Kyle

: Does the browser use Nano-X or Microwindows API (or something else)?

The Opera browser uses the Nano-X api.

Greg

I checked their site...but they only say that they are using the X11 (no
promo for Nano-X?!?!?!...cmon).  It would be cool for Nano-X to see them
get some pub.


On Wed, 17 Nov 1999, Greg Haerr wrote:

> : Does the browser use Nano-X or Microwindows API (or something else)?
> 
> The Opera browser uses the Nano-X api.
> 
------------------------------------------------------------------
"If a frog had wings, he wouldn't bump his a$$ when he hopped!"
                          - Red Foreman of That '70s Show
> Greg

>> Absolutely.. Opera Web-browser was initially developed at 1280x1024
>>
>>
>Was nanogui running on a framebuffer for this application? If so, which
one?
>Does the browser use Nano-X or Microwindows API (or something else)?


Nano-X API.  It was using regular framebuffer.
( I like it simple =)


-RIchard

>I checked their site...but they only say that they are using the X11 (no
>promo for Nano-X?!?!?!...cmon).  It would be cool for Nano-X to see them
>get some pub.


heheh 
who other than the people on this mailinglist will notice it ? =)
Actually, it is not a greater project of Opera...yet. so far I haven't 
been told to make a release of it yet, so right now - it is only to see 
if it is possible to make a release worthy web-browser on this system.


-Richard

> >> Absolutely.. Opera Web-browser was initially developed at 1280x1024
> >>
> >>
> >Was nanogui running on a framebuffer for this application? If so, which
> >one?
> >Does the browser use Nano-X or Microwindows API (or something else)?
>
>
> Nano-X API.  It was using regular framebuffer.
> ( I like it simple =)

Please excuse my ignorance, but what do you mean by a regular framebuffer?
I'm running on an Intel machine and it seems my only choice is vga16fb. Do
you use fbset to control the resolution and color depth for the fb?

Kyle.

> -----Original Message-----
> Please excuse my ignorance, but what do you mean by a regular
> framebuffer?

/dev/fb0 I guess.

> I'm running on an Intel machine and it seems my only choice
> is vga16fb.

If you compile using VESA SVGA (IIRC) support you still get the same
frame buffer....


> Do you use fbset to control the resolution and color depth for the fb?

....but you can use fbset to change the properties of this -- fbset has
(again IIRC, sorry) a config. file in /etc/fbmodes (hazey vage
memores) - I do know that *SOMEWHERE* I have a script that turns an
xfree86 config file (filled with modes for your vga card) into a fbset
config. file. I can dig it out when I get back from Vacation if you
want?

	-Darran