On Sat, 2 Feb 2002, Christoph Egger wrote: > On Mon, 28 Jan 2002, Curtis Veit wrote: > > > On Sun, Jan 27, 2002 at 11:21:55AM +0100, Christoph Egger wrote: > > > > > > Curtis wrote: > > > > [...] I may actually get enough background to start fixing up and > > > > adding pieces to GGI. I'll be playing with libbuf and libblt and > > > > libovl quite a bit I think. > > > > > > The development of all these three libs is mainly bottlenecked by two > > > things: > > > > > > 1) libgalloc needs to turn into a more major state > > > > Is discussion about this ongoing? Perhaps we should discuss > > what is needed on the GGI list. > > Not really. Sorry. Only Brian and I are involved in the todo list (and > perhaps Eric a little). Brian left his latest work on libgalloc unfinished > (i.e. releasing of resource issue, missing bugfixes). Then the targets > needs an major update. > > Brian: Could you be a bit verbose on this points, please?
Hmm... Sorry for the long absense. I was very busy at work; I had a few things on my social calender for a change; some idiot (me) bought my housemate a PS2 for a Christmas present; and then I got really sick for a week. When I have my head back together (the cold I had is one of those lingering ones) I'll try to get back in the swing of things. That, and when I've finally finished wasting my time playing FFX :-) Anyway, to summarize, I think it would be best left to me to finish the obvious guts work on LibGAlloc, though the range manager part is nicely segmented (Eric's been working on that some.) In general, we are very quickly approaching a more solid API for all the libraries, e.g.: > > > 2) libovl, libbuf and libblt needs to interact on each other transparently > > > to the user > > > > > yes, I'll see how well these work in my situations soon. ...which I do have some ideas about if the fever didn't fry them out of my brain. Once this part is done, API-wise everything will make sense and I think we will see things congeal. The horrible problem is that all the API in the world doesn't really help us if we don't have a back-end, and I keep coming back to KGI and the minute I hit the KGI codebase it begins taking 97% of my time trying to get things there organized. So I might suggest to Curtis that if he's working on a timeline he may want to do a one-off "display-my-thingy" for his particular hardware situation and not get bogged down in KGI quite yet. -- Brian
