Fba2x

[Squidge]

Yup, I'm sure it'll work without problem when we have a fully working kernel. Instead of wasting time making SS work however, it's a lot easier to leave it as it is and wait for a better kernel.

Everything will run on the frame buffer first, but thats simply because its the fastest way of getting stuff running. Remember this is all early stuff - No one knows if the Pandora will use X11 or not, which version if it does, etc.

 

[efegea]

If the pandora will not use X11, it will be a step backwards and I definitely will not buy it. I hope it will use it.

 

[Exophase]

If the pandora will not use X11, it will be a step backwards and I definitely will not buy it. I hope it will use it.

If it doesn't initially someone will just port it themselves, like what happened for GP2X (except this time it'd go to a machine that's suitable for running it well)

 

[efegea]

If it doesn't initially someone will just port it themselves, like what happened for GP2X (except this time it'd go to a machine that's suitable for running it well)

But it's not the same as having it as default..

EDIT: I have a lot of reasons to think X11 should be the default, but I have not time to enumerate all, I don't feel like doing so and my english is not so good... perhaps another time..

 

[yodaofborg]

EDIT: I have a lot of reasons to think X11 should be the default, but I have not time to enumerate all, I don't feel like doing so and my english is not so good... perhaps another time..

I have a reason to believe X11 will be default, cos craigix said something about doing something about using something like the EEE PC GUI (which is Xandros with lots of stuff missing, but Xandros is based off Debian, oooo) not hard to do on this system even if it was only 500mhz soo, I guess it will be.

 

[Squidge]

Who knows? Maybe some emulators will be in two versions - a slower version for X11 and a faster version for direct frame buffer support.

 

[Coder_TimT]

Okay, I'm about to step out of my league and ask what is probably a dumb question in regards to slower X versus faster framebuffer...

Does that only apply to non opengl 2D? Is there hardware opengl without X? My assumption from "desktop Linux" experience, was that X(and an appropriate driver) was indeed required.

If that assumption is true, then the case for X would be it's needed for hardware 3D and "fast enough" for everything else???

 

[Squidge]

No idea about the performance differences as we don't have X yet.

I'm just thinking about the differences of updating the frame buffer yourself, and giving X your frame buffer to which it then has to copy to it's own, probably needing to clip it and so on. Also, if the app isn't full screen, then there's the possibility of other things X will be doing in the background too.

With an omap-optimised X, it might have very little performance impact as I'm not really an X person.

We all know Windows has DirectX so you don't have to use the slow GDI. Anyone know if there's something similar for X? I'm assuming there is.

Ah yes, I remember now, GPH removed it from the kernel source code for the GP2X because they thought it had something to do with digital rights management, only it was actually the direct rendering manager. So a properly ported X will hopefully have little performance impact.

Am I right in thinking this? Or is there something else better for X?

 

[Yrx]

Okay, I'm kind of lost, I think. When people are asking for X, are they asking for like a desktop environment, like a PC? (KDE, Gnome, etc?)

 

[Peter R]

Look up the X Windowing System or X11.

 

[Yrx]

QUOTE
X provides the basic framework, or primitives, for building GUI environments: drawing and moving windows on the screen and interacting with a mouse and/or keyboard. X does not mandate the user interface — individual client programs handle this. As such, the visual styling of X-based environments varies greatly; different programs may present radically different interfaces.


This is from Wikipedia, and was also the general understanding I had. So are people basically just asking for a windowing system? It seems that the main reason for having it would be to make it a UMPC with a disgustingly tiny screen. Are windows even feasible?

I honestly have no idea why people are being drawn to this, or even what they expect from it. All I'm hearing are just general requests for "X." It's very unclear to me what they're actually asking for.

 

[God Ginrai]

Well, a lot of people do want it for windows. But some just want it because it will make switching between open applications and such easier. There are many other reasons as well.

But I have to disagree with your comment that windows aren't feasible. Although I couldn't see someone having 9 windows cascaded on the screen or similar, I do think that two windows at a time could definitely be a possibility, depending on the applications being used.

-God Ginrai

 

[Coder_TimT]

This is from Wikipedia, and was also the general understanding I had. So are people basically just asking for a windowing system? It seems that the main reason for having it would be to make it a UMPC with a disgustingly tiny screen. Are windows even feasible?

I honestly have no idea why people are being drawn to this, or even what they expect from it. All I'm hearing are just general requests for "X." It's very unclear to me what they're actually asking for.

To me X doesn't equal a windowing system. The window manager that sits on top of X handles that. On a typical linux system, X is the pathway to hardware accelerated graphics. A hardware specific driver is written, implementing MesaGL(the open source OpengGL) using the DRI(Direct Rendering Infrastructure) which is a part of X.

Similarly you have Xv for video acceleration which is implemented in any decent X driver.

With direct access to the hardware, I assume it could be exploited as needed without X, but at what effort??? And I don't really know what effort, maybe it's trivial???

But, as long as there is proper X implementation with a proper driver for the PowerVR SGX(which I think I'm seeing that Tungsten has developed...not sure), you should get hardware graphics acceleration for free....and it might really and truly be the only way to access OpenGL...again not sure about that...

 

[Yrx]

Looking on the archives, I found 2 games that claim to use OpenGL...

 

[Ravnos]

QUOTE
X provides the basic framework, or primitives, for building GUI environments: drawing and moving windows on the screen and interacting with a mouse and/or keyboard. X does not mandate the user interface — individual client programs handle this. As such, the visual styling of X-based environments varies greatly; different programs may present radically different interfaces.

This is from Wikipedia, and was also the general understanding I had. So are people basically just asking for a windowing system? It seems that the main reason for having it would be to make it a UMPC with a disgustingly tiny screen. Are windows even feasible?

I honestly have no idea why people are being drawn to this, or even what they expect from it. All I'm hearing are just general requests for "X." It's very unclear to me what they're actually asking for.

Disgustingly tiny screen? My N800 has roughly the same size screen and it happily runs an X11-based GUI. I'm typing this message on it right now and everything looks nice and clear. An X-based WM doesn't have to be as heavy as Gnome or KDE, it can be quite light and intuitive on a small device and provide plenty of functionality.

Honestly, I'm really hoping the Pandora team take a few cues from Nokia here. The N-seris tablets are great little devices, and adding serious gaming capability to such a device could be a real home run for these guys.

 

[Yrx]

So okay, just so I get this straight, what everyone's basically asking for is a desktop environment? lol, No one likes to answer my questions.

 

[God Ginrai]

So okay, just so I get this straight, what everyone's basically asking for is a desktop environment? lol, No one likes to answer my questions.

Well, if you know what the definition of X11 is, then you know what these people are technically looking for. But these people are looking for different things and purposes in it, and that's what you should be asking.

You already know the answer of whether or not they are looking for a desktop environment. Instead, you should be asking, "why is X so important" or "why do you guys want X?"

-God Ginrai

 

[Coder_TimT]

So okay, just so I get this straight, what everyone's basically asking for is a desktop environment? lol, No one likes to answer my questions.

My response was an answer. And it was no, I'm not asking for a desktop environment. I'm asking for the easiest way to access the PowerVR SGX graphics accelerator under Linux. And I'm assuming it will be via X. And as I can find no other reference to hardware OpenGL under linux except via X, I'm also assuming that is the only way we are getting OpenGL support also. Nothing to do with the desktop environment, that could be run under X also, but simply the best way to take advantage of the hardware.

As for there not being any GL games in the archive, this is because the GP32 and GP2X did not have hardware OpenGL support. There were software renderers written, but nothing that ran at a truly reasonable speed...thus no software taking advantage of it...

 

[Yrx]

Ugh. Just ugh. I know what X11 is, but other than Coder_TimT, I didn't get any direct answers as to why people wanted it. God Ginrai, you just said what some people supposedly wanted and then argued with my thoughts that the screen would be too small for a window manager (which doesn't really matter either way, I'm trying to figure out people's opinions). And then Ravnos started harping on my albeit unsubstantiated opinions without explaining what he wanted either.

I'm asking an honest question. People were being unclear for what they wanted X11. Some people are talking like they want a fullblown desktop environment, and then others talking about completely different stuff. I'm trying to get a consensus on if everyone is even talking about the same thing.

Oh, and Coder_TimT, this game for GP2X says it's using OpenGL. I have no idea how they implemented it, but it would seem to suggest that built-in X isn't necessary for it.

 

[Coder_TimT]

Oh, and Coder_TimT, this game for GP2X says it's using OpenGL. I have no idea how they implemented it, but it would seem to suggest that built-in X isn't necessary for it.



Software implementation of OpenGL...so it can be implemented to draw to the screen in whatever way is desired. The key is how to access the hardware OpenGL. The standard linux way is via X and a vendor provided driver. Without that, there is a long road ahead before we get hardware accelerated 3D apps on Pandora...

Of course, this discussion has kind of gotten off of Squidge's original topic. Technically I guess an argument of framebuffer versus X w/DRI would fit, although there are too many unknowns at this point for a reasonable discussion, but still it's probably wandering too far off topic and should exist elsewhere.