GTK+/X based system on 64MB flash and ram size budget?
Hi All, We need to select an open-source GUI library for system where it will have 64MB of total flash and same RAM size running on the embedded processor like OMAP/DaVinci with around 300MHz. The number of GUI applications running will be only one main control application acting as say recorder, player and streamer and other control functionalities, think video server. Does GTK+/X combination will be a nice fit for this flash, ram and cpu speed budget? OR will be too bloated in terms of minimum functionalities and single GUI application we need? Flash will also have other software images like kernel, bootloader, busybox, uclibc/glibc, boa like embedded webserver stored along with the gtk+/x libraries and gui application. Please give your suggestions/inputs. Thanx. -- --Trilok Soni ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: GTK+/X based system on 64MB flash and ram size budget?
Hi, ext Trilok Soni wrote: We need to select an open-source GUI library for system where it will have 64MB of total flash and same RAM size running on the embedded processor like OMAP/DaVinci with around 300MHz. The number of GUI applications running will be only one main control application acting as say recorder, player and streamer and other control functionalities, think video server. Does GTK+/X combination will be a nice fit for this flash, ram and cpu speed budget? OR will be too bloated in terms of minimum functionalities and single GUI application we need? Flash will also have other software images like kernel, bootloader, busybox, uclibc/glibc, boa like embedded webserver stored along with the gtk+/x libraries and gui application. Please give your suggestions/inputs. Thanx. If you don't have something that needs to show arbitrary amounts of data to user such as www-browser or PDF viewer, 64MB is enough. (regardless of widget set or whether you use X or directly fb). - Eero ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: GTK+/X based system on 64MB flash and ram size budget?
Hi Eero, On 10/31/07, Eero Tamminen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, ext Trilok Soni wrote: We need to select an open-source GUI library for system where it will have 64MB of total flash and same RAM size running on the embedded processor like OMAP/DaVinci with around 300MHz. The number of GUI applications running will be only one main control application acting as say recorder, player and streamer and other control functionalities, think video server. Does GTK+/X combination will be a nice fit for this flash, ram and cpu speed budget? OR will be too bloated in terms of minimum functionalities and single GUI application we need? Flash will also have other software images like kernel, bootloader, busybox, uclibc/glibc, boa like embedded webserver stored along with the gtk+/x libraries and gui application. Please give your suggestions/inputs. Thanx. If you don't have something that needs to show arbitrary amounts of data to user such as www-browser or PDF viewer, 64MB is enough. (regardless of widget set or whether you use X or directly fb). Thanx for the inputs. True, it is no where like Internet Tablet, it will not have applications like www-browser or pdf reader. It might support local playback, streaming player, recorder with preview and some other functionalities to control various input and output sources/sinks. In this case using GTKFb looks good, and having d-bus with it to communicate with other CLI daemon applications to transfer messages. Hope GTKfb doesn't limit the use of d-bus, AFAIK. Only limiting thing with GTKFb will be like one should one binary (GUI app) doing everything we want to show it to the end-user. Hope I understood this point. -- --Trilok Soni ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: GTK+/X based system on 64MB flash and ram size budget?
Dear Trilok, ext Trilok Soni wrote: We need to select an open-source GUI library for system where it will have 64MB of total flash and same RAM size running on the embedded processor like OMAP/DaVinci with around 300MHz. The number of GUI applications running will be only one main control application acting as say recorder, player and streamer and other control functionalities, think video server. Does GTK+/X combination will be a nice fit for this flash, ram and cpu speed budget? OR will be too bloated in terms of minimum functionalities and single GUI application we need? Flash will also have other software images like kernel, bootloader, busybox, uclibc/glibc, boa like embedded webserver stored along with the gtk+/x libraries and gui application. Please give your suggestions/inputs. Thanx. If you don't have something that needs to show arbitrary amounts of data to user such as www-browser or PDF viewer, 64MB is enough. (regardless of widget set or whether you use X or directly fb). Thanx for the inputs. True, it is no where like Internet Tablet, it will not have applications like www-browser or pdf reader. It might support local playback, streaming player, recorder with preview and some other functionalities to control various input and output sources/sinks. In this case using GTKFb looks good, and having d-bus with it to communicate with other CLI daemon applications to transfer messages. Hope GTKfb doesn't limit the use of d-bus, AFAIK. Only limiting thing with GTKFb will be like one should one binary (GUI app) doing everything we want to show it to the end-user. Hope I understood this point. I agree with Eero. We have provided an GTK+/X based linux platform to customers running a 200MHz ARM with 32MB of flash and 64 megs of memory and it all works smoothly. The platform, even if not optimized perfectly, fits into less than 32 megs including a desktop environment that has loaded GTK+ into memory. So this leaves already 32 megs for application to use. For example, doing a VOIP phone, with simple contact list driven UI this is more than enough. One can even add a simple browser, to allow user to login to WLANs etc. Please note that the screen size is one important factor here. The bigger screen means more graphics etc. Also in some cases X can be more memory efficient than DirectFB, for example. Later uses backbuffers for each window where X is more configurable. People always say that X is designed for high end desktops, which is of course true. Only that X11 protocol was designed 20 years ago, so the definition of high end might have changed a little :-) Br, Sampo ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: GTK+/X based system on 64MB flash and ram size budget?
Hi Sampo, On 10/31/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dear Trilok, ext Trilok Soni wrote: We need to select an open-source GUI library for system where it will have 64MB of total flash and same RAM size running on the embedded processor like OMAP/DaVinci with around 300MHz. The number of GUI applications running will be only one main control application acting as say recorder, player and streamer and other control functionalities, think video server. Does GTK+/X combination will be a nice fit for this flash, ram and cpu speed budget? OR will be too bloated in terms of minimum functionalities and single GUI application we need? Flash will also have other software images like kernel, bootloader, busybox, uclibc/glibc, boa like embedded webserver stored along with the gtk+/x libraries and gui application. Please give your suggestions/inputs. Thanx. If you don't have something that needs to show arbitrary amounts of data to user such as www-browser or PDF viewer, 64MB is enough. (regardless of widget set or whether you use X or directly fb). Thanx for the inputs. True, it is no where like Internet Tablet, it will not have applications like www-browser or pdf reader. It might support local playback, streaming player, recorder with preview and some other functionalities to control various input and output sources/sinks. In this case using GTKFb looks good, and having d-bus with it to communicate with other CLI daemon applications to transfer messages. Hope GTKfb doesn't limit the use of d-bus, AFAIK. Only limiting thing with GTKFb will be like one should one binary (GUI app) doing everything we want to show it to the end-user. Hope I understood this point. I agree with Eero. We have provided an GTK+/X based linux platform to customers running a 200MHz ARM with 32MB of flash and 64 megs of memory and it all works smoothly. The platform, even if not optimized perfectly, fits into less than 32 megs including a desktop environment that has loaded GTK+ into memory. So this leaves already 32 megs for application to use. Ok, so out of 64meg of RAM atleast 32megs remained for other applications to use at run time. What was the approx size taken by GTK+/X libraries on that 32MB flash? For example, doing a VOIP phone, with simple contact list driven UI this is more than enough. One can even add a simple browser, to allow user to login to WLANs etc. Ok. Please note that the screen size is one important factor here. The bigger screen means more graphics etc. Also in some cases X can be more memory efficient than DirectFB, for example. Later uses backbuffers for each window where X is more configurable. In terms of screen, output will be show on the TV using some OSD windows. Like OMAP2 processors support displaying all the graphics windows on TV, like N93. In case of no. of widgets, the main application will have following minimum widgets: 1. Buttons 2. Tab Pages (Tab bar and page associated with it - to form menus for control selections) 3. IP Address 4. wireframe grid 5. playback, preview windows, 6. Scrollable lists 7. Checkboxes 8. Calender 9. Digital and Analog Clock 10. Soft Keypad 11. PIN Login 12. Menus 13. TextBoxes And ofcourse most of the widgets will have suitable icon images on them and probably themes in future. People always say that X is designed for high end desktops, which is of course true. Only that X11 protocol was designed 20 years ago, so the definition of high end might have changed a little :-) Very well said :-). Thanx for the inputs. -- --Trilok Soni ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
