Re: SDL vs GGI

[Christian Reiniger <warewolf@mayn.de>]

Pierre Phaneuf wrote:
>Alexandre Courbot wrote:
>
>> That's why I would suggest GGI. It has good performances, works both in X
>> and console (plus some other weird displays :)) is not too high level and it
>> will be soon in all distributions.

>If GGI get a similar level of "support" by the distributions (just
>including the package, that is), tell me what would be the advantage of
>GGI over Svgalib? If the advantage is that it at least work in X, then
>tell me why I wouldn't use Xlib instead and gain the ability to pop
>multiple windows and support cut & paste?

About two to three weeks ago two important things happened concerning GGI.

The first was that the GGI and the XFree people started to talk with each
other again, clearing out many of the silly misunderstandings that had
accumulated over the time and starting cooperative work, most notably on
XFree-on-GGI (having a normal XFree run on GGI with everything that
implies) and GGI-on-XFree (making it possible to use the XFree4 modular gfx
drivers from GGI - for example for console graphics).

The second one was a rather big progress in adding hardware acceleration to
more or less the existing fbcon framework, making it more likely that this
stuff gets into the kernel.

I haven't read through the 545 mails that have piled up in my GGI folder
since then, so I can't tell you about the situation now. But don't write
off GGI. GGI is graphics access done properly. It's technically the best
system out there.


	Christian

--

Drive A: not responding...Formatting C: instead