From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1DbPf4-00020w-B9
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 26 May 2005 17:13:02 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1DbPf2-0001zX-1Y
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 26 May 2005 17:13:00 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DbPf0-0001uJ-WC
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 26 May 2005 17:12:59 -0400
Received: from [64.233.184.194] (helo=wproxy.gmail.com)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1DbPa8-0003LW-9J
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 26 May 2005 17:07:56 -0400
Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 71so1509611wra
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Thu, 26 May 2005 14:07:11 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <46d6db660505261407771aa387@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 26 May 2005 23:07:11 +0200
From: Christian MICHON <christian.michon@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] Embed QEmu screen on a custom window
In-Reply-To: <42962B93.1040606@bellard.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <26b3ab7050526044214f0ff81@mail.gmail.com>
	<46d6db660505260510767c2cf7@mail.gmail.com>
	<42962B93.1040606@bellard.org>
Reply-To: Christian MICHON <christian.michon@gmail.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

Hi Fabrice,

I understand your point clearly, and I still remembered it.
But adding whichever toolkit would be adding pixels around the
qemu instance, and it would have to interact with SDL.

My simple logic here is why not do it in SDL itself, like an
OSD you'd call by bindkey, like a TV remote control ?

I do not know what cocoa.m implementation is, but I've seen
screenshots. It does require space, and if you go full-screen,
you can't do modifications. Hence the suggestion to go
full SDL.

I'll still look into the 4 SDL-guitoolkits I mentionned. Interesting
stuff they can do... :)

> As I said earlier, I would prefer to integrate the GUI in QEMU like the
> cocoa.m implementation. GTK for Linux is the best option. For Windows,
> either GTK or a native GUI usage would be possible, depending on the
> reliability of the GTK port for Windows.
>=20
> Fabrice.
>=20


--=20
Christian