Charles Crisler wrote: > I am curious about the architecture plan for gnash relative to GUIs and > rendering. Currently you support several GUIs and 3 rendering backends. > I also haven't found that you can download Linux binaries. Maybe there > is a correlation? :-)
Nope, none at all. We do have some linux binaries, including some in rpm, deb, and xpi packages for a variety of machines. These are at http://www.getgnash.org, maybe you missed it. :-) Most people prefer to get their binary packages from their distribution, like Ubuntu or Fedora. Most of our GUIs are a thin layer on top of a generic gui library for the real guts. I personally like portable code, so I don't see any reason to not have different GUIs for different reasons. Konqueror users need a flash plugin as much as Firefox users, so we have GTK and KDE support both. On embedded platforms there are less resources, so GUIs like SDL, FLTK, or a raw framebuffer work much better. Much of the reasons for this are historical. Originally Gnash was OpenGL and SDL only. SDL is limited for a decent GUI, so I wrote GTK support, while keeping the SDL support alive. Then somebody donated KDE support, Udo added the raw framebuffer support, etc... OpenGL was nice, but many devices don't have a GPU, so Udo added the the AGG backend. If you do have a GPU, OpenGL is nice, so that was keep alive as well. Cairo was also donated. While having all these options may seem like a distraction, being able to run on most anything is important for free software. - rob - _______________________________________________ Gnash-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnash-dev
