On Thu, 06 May 2010 20:11:53 +0200 Bernd Roesch <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hello > > On 06.05.10, you wrote: > > > > > It's a lot less work than you think. Also, what about writing a > > native surface provider for libnsfb rather than these layers of > > hacks you keep using? > > you mean something as the libnsfb/src/surface/x.c but for the amiga > OS window /message/graphic funcs ? That's one approach. It is not the best one, but then again you have ignored our advice in the past. > > And the framebuffer version of NetSurf will not support that, > > because it is not what it is for. Why do you keep arguing for this? > > this sound diffrent than you tell first.when the framebuffer should > never give a full browser, then also use of amiga OS funcs instead > of SDL do not help much. The framebuffer front end is not a full browser. Nor will it ever be. The SDL surface for the framebuffer front end is a debug tool. It will never, ever, ever be an accepted front end. Please, stop hacking features into it, and then complaining on these lists that things you have broken no longer work. B.
