From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1LPjG9-0005YD-N0
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 21 Jan 2009 15:01:09 -0500
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1LPjG8-0005Wo-Oe
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 21 Jan 2009 15:01:09 -0500
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=38140 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LPjG8-0005WN-GO
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 21 Jan 2009 15:01:08 -0500
Received: from smtp.eu.citrix.com ([62.200.22.115]:27826)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <Stefano.Stabellini@eu.citrix.com>)
	id 1LPjG8-0006hZ-1V
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 21 Jan 2009 15:01:08 -0500
Message-ID: <49777E00.2070105@eu.citrix.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 19:56:48 +0000
From: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [6391] Fix nographic mode and VNC
References: <E1LPikI-0005cS-RK@cvs.savannah.gnu.org>	<49777A05.3090403@eu.citrix.com>
	<f43fc5580901211152l39b57f22ndaa410b44dc7cf48@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <f43fc5580901211152l39b57f22ndaa410b44dc7cf48@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: 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

Blue Swirl wrote:

> On 1/21/09, Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com> wrote:
>> If you just want to always have a timer enabled maybe this patch is better.
>>  I wouldn't want you to add another timer when the gui_timer is available
>>  for this job :)
> 
> I thought about that, but I didn't want to run gui_update when a dummy
> function is enough and more accurate.
> 


In that case gui_update wouldn't do anything because none registered a
dpy_refresh function.

But I agree that a dummy function is more accurate.