From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=43506 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OE85j-00020g-Uc
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 17 May 2010 17:43:20 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <anthony@codemonkey.ws>) id 1OE85c-0005Fm-8n
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 17 May 2010 17:43:15 -0400
Received: from mail-yw0-f202.google.com ([209.85.211.202]:34739)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <anthony@codemonkey.ws>) id 1OE85c-0005Ff-4B
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 17 May 2010 17:43:08 -0400
Received: by ywh40 with SMTP id 40so2626245ywh.18
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Mon, 17 May 2010 14:43:07 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4BF1B866.3030605@codemonkey.ws>
Date: Mon, 17 May 2010 16:43:02 -0500
From: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] Add QEMU DirectFB display driver
References: <1273766038-16808-1-git-send-email-julian.pidancet@citrix.com>	<201005160210.25323.paul@codesourcery.com>	<4BF1A4FF.4020401@redhat.com>
	<4BF1A7C9.8030807@codemonkey.ws>
	<alpine.LNX.2.00.1005180130220.2537@linmac>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LNX.2.00.1005180130220.2537@linmac>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
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.nongnu.org/archive/html/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: malc <av1474@comtv.ru>
Cc: Julian Pidancet <julian.pidancet@citrix.com>, Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Paul Brook <paul@codesourcery.com>

On 05/17/2010 04:35 PM, malc wrote:
> There's one thing that SDL does marvelously well - it's just one fairly
> small and self contained library that doesn't unleash dependency hell on
> the user.
>    
>> The fact that we have cocoa support in the tree is basically an admission of
>> failure with SDL.
>>      
> I don't think so, the way i see it: someone had an itch (i.e. an
> application that does not integrate well with his windowing environment)
> and he scratched it.
>    

SDL doesn't integrate well into a modern Gnome desktop either.  I don't 
see why we have Cocoa and not Gtk.  If the answer is, someone needs to 
send patches, expect patches soon :-)

Regards,

Anthony Liguori