On 1/3/06, Nathanael D. Noblet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, 2006-01-03 at 11:39 +0100, Unger Richard wrote: > > Wow! Thanks for that detailed analysis! I certainly don't disagree with > > what you're saying, however, from my point of view there are the following > > considerations: > > > > * The software stacks you describe (webkit or svg based) would require > > quite a bit of development and optimization to get running - I was hoping > > to get soemthing done in my spare time (as soon as I get my PC running > > again, damn hardware, grrr!) at home. Mozilla (in particular working with > > the GTK backend, which would require mainly 'removing' X code) seemed like > > a 'fast path' to the goal of a browser under dfb. > > I looked at porting mozilla over awhile ago. It was over my head. I did > however speak with some of the mozilla devs. They said, to be careful > about porting it over as they were going to be moving towards a cairo > backend, and so the gtk,X stuff would be come irrelevant. This is from > my memory so could be hazy. However the reason I bring this up is that > someone has been workin on getting a dfb cairo backend. Thus if you want > to bring a browser into dfb, I would look into the cairo/mozilla and you > may be done?... >
That someone for cairo is me :) And yes I'm well aware of the cairo branch in mozilla and follow the work :) Mike > -- > Nathanael D. Noblet > Gnat Solutions > http://www.gnat.ca/ > T 250.385.4613 > C 250.893.4613 > > > _______________________________________________ > directfb-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://mail.directfb.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/directfb-dev > _______________________________________________ directfb-dev mailing list [email protected] http://mail.directfb.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/directfb-dev
