As a Linux user I don't care either why, I can only show my sympathy to the entire windows user community.
I have one/two question though do all the dependencies build correctly on cygwin - how many problems will actually need to be fixed. It is important to access the exact size of the problem before deciding to go over or around it... or is that a mountain? Does sdl improve flightgear at all? -If it is put in do we see some real advances? Might time be better spent cleaning up the code? Isn't it really the 'wrong' time to be doing this - 1.0 will be a mega big release, shouldn't it be done e.g. 1.2+, branched etc? No more time, Chris On Tue, 2003-08-12 at 22:23, Erik Hofman wrote: > Curtis L. Olson wrote: > > > Anyone else have any positives or negatives? Any red flags, or > > additional issues we should consider? > > I really would like to have SDL support available in FlightGear. In can > give FG a good step in the right direction. If Cygwin isn't supported > that would be a major drawback though. > > Positives: > > * Native Win32 threading support > * Native IRIX sproc threading support > * Most functions have multi threading added > * MMX support where needed > * Ability to set the video mode (not just the window size) > * Event scheduler > * Cross platform timer functions > > * Network support routines (separate libraries) > * Audio mixer support routines (separate library) > > And all of that by adding just a very thin software layer. > > Erik > > > _______________________________________________ > Flightgear-devel mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel -- Christopher S Horler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
