From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=39310 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OEMR8-00029J-KR for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 18 May 2010 09:02:21 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OEMR5-0001XG-G1 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 18 May 2010 09:02:18 -0400 Received: from mail-vw0-f45.google.com ([209.85.212.45]:42480) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OEMR5-0001Vw-2t for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 18 May 2010 09:02:15 -0400 Received: by vws1 with SMTP id 1so1717155vws.4 for ; Tue, 18 May 2010 06:02:09 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4BF28FCF.5090300@codemonkey.ws> Date: Tue, 18 May 2010 08:02:07 -0500 From: Anthony Liguori 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> <4BF1B866.3030605@codemonkey.ws> <4BF24B57.8020504@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <4BF24B57.8020504@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Kevin Wolf Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Paul Brook , Julian Pidancet , Gerd Hoffmann On 05/18/2010 03:09 AM, Kevin Wolf wrote: > Am 17.05.2010 23:43, schrieb Anthony Liguori: > >> 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 :-) >> > So with this argument, we'll not only get a GTK backend, but Qt and > Windows backends, too? But then you can't reasonably say any more that > DirectFB would be too much additional code to maintain. > Yes, that's the point. Instead of having a single backend (SDL) and expecting SDL to do everything for us, we would support multiple backends (like DirectFB). Regards, Anthony Liguori > Kevin >