> I had been thinking that it would also be a good idea to provide both X11 > and framebuffer environments, since there almost certainly won't be room for > both in the base image. I assume that opie needs to be built differently > for X11 and Qt/e, though I haven't looked at this at all really. I have an > xfree86-tinyx deb (in unstable) which runs X on the framebuffer and supports > the Zaurus touchscreen, using a daemon which translates the Zaurus > touchscreen events into equivalent iPAQ touchscreen events (which > xfree86-tinyx supports). It's a little rough, but does work. Eventually, > it would be nice for xfree86-tinyx to support the Zaurus touchscreen > natively and get rid of the daemon hack. > > Ideally, we would be able to support configurations like: > > - opie on qt/e > - opie on x11 > - traditional x11 with matchbox and a menu of some sort > > This might be a little ambitious for the first cut of the packages, if it's > nontrivial, but it's something to keep in mind.
I guess my question would be what do we currently "need". Is there a current need for both x11 & qt/e versions of opie on all archs? We can provide both x11 & qt/e versions of opie but that of course doubles the amount of packages. I know we all just love hearing that evil word from the ftp guys "bloat". :) Ivan Ivan -- ---------------- Ivan E. Moore II [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://snowcrash.tdyc.com GPG KeyID=90BCE0DD GPG Fingerprint=F2FC 69FD 0DA0 4FB8 225E 27B6 7645 8141 90BC E0DD -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
