We all know and love Q_WS_MAEMO_5 and Q_OS_SYMBIAN for getting work done.
However, as everybody ends up seeing,, there is no equivalent for meego.
If we ended up having one, what would it look like?
Q_MEEGO_VER_MAJOR, Q_MEEGO_VER_MINOR
Q_MEEGO_PROFILE tablet-reference
?
Em Monday, 13 de June de 2011, às 17:30:40, Ville M. Vainio escreveu:
We all know and love Q_WS_MAEMO_5 and Q_OS_SYMBIAN for getting work done.
However, as everybody ends up seeing,, there is no equivalent for meego.
If we ended up having one, what would it look like?
Q_MEEGO_VER_MAJOR,
On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 23:42:10 +0200
Thiago Macieira thi...@kde.org wrote:
Em Monday, 13 de June de 2011, às 17:30:40, Ville M. Vainio escreveu:
We all know and love Q_WS_MAEMO_5 and Q_OS_SYMBIAN for getting work
done.
However, as everybody ends up seeing,, there is no equivalent for
On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 15:05:41 -0700
Arjan van de Ven ar...@linux.intel.com wrote:
On 6/13/2011 2:57 PM, Bernd Stramm wrote:
It feels like it has been maybe 6 months or so, time to bring this
up again:
why isn't there a way to determine the physical display size at run
time? Or maybe
On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 5:42 PM, Thiago Macieira thi...@kde.org wrote:
There isn't one because MeeGo is just X11 (today). And the build is for all
verticals, so you can't add a compile-time define for the MeeGo version and
vertical.
Fair enough.
Would it be possible, in all meego uxen, to
On 6/13/2011 3:12 PM, Bernd Stramm wrote:
On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 15:05:41 -0700
Arjan van de Venar...@linux.intel.com wrote:
On 6/13/2011 2:57 PM, Bernd Stramm wrote:
It feels like it has been maybe 6 months or so, time to bring this
up again:
why isn't there a way to determine the physical
On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 15:16:21 -0700
Arjan van de Ven ar...@linux.intel.com wrote:
On 6/13/2011 3:12 PM, Bernd Stramm wrote:
On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 15:05:41 -0700
Arjan van de Venar...@linux.intel.com wrote:
On 6/13/2011 2:57 PM, Bernd Stramm wrote:
It feels like it has been maybe 6 months
On 6/13/2011 3:27 PM, Bernd Stramm wrote:
But it could be worse than you think. The size info would be useful for
displays that are not build into the meego device. Docking stations,
projectors and the like. That is where it gets really interesting, and
uxlaunch probably has less control.
the
Em Monday, 13 de June de 2011, às 15:32:50, Arjan van de Ven escreveu:
On 6/13/2011 3:27 PM, Bernd Stramm wrote:
But it could be worse than you think. The size info would be useful for
displays that are not build into the meego device. Docking stations,
projectors and the like. That is
On 6/13/2011 3:42 PM, Thiago Macieira wrote:
The problem is that actual dimensions, resolution and DPI are tied to one
another. Some systems are known to force the DPI value at a specific number and
they do that by changing the actual dimensions reported by X.
I've seen this even presented as a
Em Monday, 13 de June de 2011, às 15:49:27, Arjan van de Ven escreveu:
On 6/13/2011 3:42 PM, Thiago Macieira wrote:
The problem is that actual dimensions, resolution and DPI are tied to
one
another. Some systems are known to force the DPI value at a specific
number and they do that by
On 06/13/2011 03:49 PM, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
I've seen this even presented as a configuration setting to users in some
systems...
interesting observation for some systems
By way of example: the NVIDIA binary drivers have for years attempted
to expose a correct DPI value based on the EDID
12 matches
Mail list logo
