Sean Cribbs wrote: > I disagree. While I believe that a gui-only system is nice, many people > prefer text-based user interfaces or command-line interfaces. Plus, > they are much simpler to create and will give us something to test our > code on once the bare-bones system is ready. i did not mean JOS should not have a CLI but it should be implemented in a graphic environment but i accept the fact that they are easier to create. > Hmm... I don't know if this is necessary because JOS is supposed to > allow users to specify drivers while the system (gui/cli/etc) is > running. Most driver changes should not require a reboot or special > startup selection procedures. again i just meant that this gives you a startup configuration .. i _hope_ that driver implementation is realtime ;) > What are you trying to say? If you're referring to a registry, there is > already one in the making. exactly what i thought of ;) > AFAIK from discussions with Digigod, JADE is the underlying system upon > which all UIs rest. It provides things that are common among the UIs, > like receiving keystrokes, handling graphics devices, input devices, and > other output devices. The other UIs can be then defined using JADE as > the workbeast. For example, a Traditional GUI would ask JADE to put the > video card in graphics mode, and ask for a specific part of the screen > to draw on. It would not have to know how all of this is being done. > JADE is for UIs what OO is for imperative programming -- hiding all the > work behind a nice interface, and making it reusable. i agree in this concept ... it should be easy to port to other platforms (not just x86) all in one it was just an idea and i wanted you all to know about it ... i would really like to join you work but i think that i dont know enough to help you much but i start learning ;) (first thing is to get cvs running to download the source ...) Sebastian Hesselbarth _______________________________________________ UI maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://jos.org/mailman/listinfo/ui
