On 09-05-17 10:44, Alex J Lennon wrote:
On 09/05/17 09:05, Alexander Kanavin wrote:
On 05/09/2017 01:15 AM, Paul Eggleton wrote:
LXDE in particular is Gtk2 based, it's no longer being developed, and
has been superseded by LXQt. So it's a non-starter (and so is LXQt,
which should be clear from its name :).
FWIW I think this is a little short-sighted. Why are we ruling out Qt exactly?
We would first have to agree that Qt5 belongs in oe-core with appropriate
level of maintenance and QA, and that it's okay to add half an hour or more
to the building time of a standard GUI image.
From the screenshots of LxQT, it looks like yet another Win95 clone meant
strictly for desktop use that would certainly scale poorly to small
resolution screens. Who would be the target audience for it in the embedded
space? For the purposes of 'engineering UI', Sato is fine, and we don't need
something else.
Alex
fwiw. I would love to be able to develop devices like those pictured below,
which I believe are based on Qt for Device Creation.
https://d33sqmjvzgs8hq.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/devices.png
Things like that can be cooked up in OE using just meta-qt4 (or 5, but haven't
tried yet) and a main application recipe (just a QT project that you develop
on your desktop) that inherits qt4e.
Qt doesn't need X11, saving big on build and boot time.
A Zynq demo running QT on a plain framebuffer boots in about 7 seconds (from
NOR flash) into the fully functional GUI, on a 10" touch panel, and all of it
fits in about 20MB flash storage.
Kind regards,
Mike Looijmans
System Expert
TOPIC Products
Materiaalweg 4, NL-5681 RJ Best
Postbus 440, NL-5680 AK Best
Telefoon: +31 (0) 499 33 69 79
E-mail: mike.looijm...@topicproducts.com
Website: www.topicproducts.com
Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail
--
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
