On Tue, 18 May 2010, Alexander Graf wrote: > > On 17.05.2010, at 23:45, malc wrote: > > > On Mon, 17 May 2010, Anthony Liguori wrote: > > > >> 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 :-) > >> > > > > If those patches don't try to force Gnome on me (by removing SDL that is > > and being optional) let them come. > > I'm trying to think of a project where the clean separation between > multiple video outputs implemented in the backend and a separate > frontend worked out. So far the only case that has a strikingly > similar architecture coming to my mind is mplayer. And I wouldn't > call mplayer's GUI story a huge success.
Xine, VLC do have something resembling this separation too. As for mplayer's GUI, never used it, what i did (and still) use is my own video output device for mplayer, which is a lot faster than Xv, or anything else for that matter, on my hardware. > > In fact, couldn't we rather keep all graphic output out of qemu and > just expose VNC, possibly with self-made additions to the protocol > to speed up local rendering (thinking an SHM extension here)? Then > we could still offer a separate SDL based viewer that could do the > same things it does now. But we'd also open up the gate for a whole > new integration level with possible GUIs. > This idea is not new, nothing has come out of it till this day, so the answer to your question (couldn't we...) is probably: no, we couldn't. -- mailto:av1...@comtv.ru
