Norman wrote: > Out of curiosity what can't you do today that would make FlightGear > better because we are using GLUT that you would do differently today > if we were using SDL and what exactly is it that would make FGFS > better.
Off the top of my head: + Build out of the box on Fedora, which no longer ships glut. Other linux distributions are likely to drop it in the future as well, I suspect. It has portability issues when built against current versions of the X libraries and has a license which disallows redistribution of modified versions. + Switch video modes on an XFree86/Xorg server, which has supported this capability for 4+ years but have never had a complete "game mode" glut port written. + Be able to handle stuff like "Shift-3" instead of "#", so the Europeans don't think our key mappings are on drugs. + Future features we might like to investigate: SDL has a portable threading API, so we could enable threads by default. SDL has an audio library which is more featureful and portable than SL (it speaks to APIs like ALSA, arts, ESD, and DirectSound; SL doesn't even work on my laptop) Seriously, glut has not been maintained for almost 6 (!) years. Almost no one else uses it. It was a nice demo library in its time, but it has long since faded. Everybody doing portable open source OpenGL development is using SDL. I don't like everything about the library, but I can feel where the wind is blowing. And I'm serious: if you want to write a Win32 implementation of the stuff in fg_os.hxx, feel free. The whole point of having an abstraction API under our own control is that it allows us to do things our way. I'm not wedded to SDL, by any means. Honestly, I thought you of all people would enjoy this change. Andy _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
