Re: GDK-DirectFB Patches
- From: "Mike Emmel" <mike emmel gmail com>
- To: "Carl Worth" <cworth cworth org>, "Claudio Ciccani" <klan users sf net>, "Attilio Fiandrotti" <attilio fiandrotti gmail com>
- Cc: gtk-devel-list gnome org, Denis Oliver Kropp <dok directfb org>, directfb-dev directfb org
- Subject: Re: GDK-DirectFB Patches
- Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2007 10:22:08 -0800
Hi Carl Claudio one of the main directfb developers has a lot of cairo
patches setting on the directfb git server.
One can you give him check-in rights for Cairo.
And next we need to make sure that we are not breaking gdk. One
approach may mean to pass in a features arg
when initializing Cairo. It could be a simple bool accel or no acceleration.
This would allow users to always have a know working if slow
implementation. It should also support env vars.
And finally it might make sense if we want to do something like this
to make it generic.
For the secondary ports its not easy to do comprehensive testing so I
think its useful.
Finally since cairo and gtk both link directfb we may want to
consider a way to get the version of the runtime back end that both
where linked against to ensure compatibility. I think glitz and the
OSX backends could also use this info and even Windows for vista
On Dec 5, 2007 9:34 AM, Carl Worth <cworth cworth org> wrote:
> On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 11:09:33 +0100, Denis Oliver Kropp wrote:
> > CAIRO-DIRECTFB: Use DirectFB for show_glyphs() even if it is unaccelerated.
> > The software fallback in DirectFB is well optimized.
> Hi Denis,
> I'm inclined to let anyone who wants to maintain
> cairo-directfb-surface.c do whatever they feel is best to it. But
> could you please send proposed patches to the cairo mailing list?
> There are probably cairo-directfb maintainers there that will want to
> review this.
> > -#if DFB_SHOW_GLYPHS
> > +#if DFB_SHOW_GLYPHS && 0
> > if (!(dsc.acceleration_mask & DFXL_BLIT) ||
> > !(dsc.blitting_flags & DSBLIT_COLORIZE) ||
> > !(dsc.blitting_flags & DSBLIT_BLEND_ALPHACHANNEL))
> Why leave this code around? If it's truly not wanted, it would be
> cleaner to remove it.
> gtk-devel-list mailing list
> gtk-devel-list gnome org
] [Thread Prev