Hi,
ecore_x looks like an optional dependency for ETK. Would it be possible
to run it without X at all? I already work with framebuffer-only
versions of evas, ecore and edje. It would be nice to have access to a
full blown widget toolkit without needing X. While I can do a lot of
impressive
Hi Michael,
The ./configure script indeed looks for Ecore_X and doesn't complain if
Ecore_X is not detected but there are still some pieces of code in Etk
that uses Ecore_X without the #ifdef/#endif thing (Etk_Popup_Window
for example), so for now, you can't compile Etk for the framebuffer.
But
If you want a widget set that already supports the framebuffer, you
could use EWL. If you want ETK specifically, you have to use X until
it supports other engines or nesting in an existing Evas.
On 6/18/06, Michael 'Mickey' Lauer
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
ecore_x looks like an optional
OK, so not strictly on topic, sorry, but as there are all sorts of these
things going round I thought I would chip in.
eSudoku is a sudoku solver (and generator) using the enlightenment
libraries (well, not really many of them yet - edje is coming).
I think it is the fasted solver on linux and it
Simon wrote:
But we plan to put all the Ecore_X-dependant code in a separated dir
(ie the files etk_dnd.c, etk_selection.c, etk_clipboard.c,
etk_popup_window.c, ...) so a framebuffer port could be really easily
written.
That's good news. I'll keep holding my breath for that :)
Nathan wrote:
Hi all,
i have some doubts-ideas about evas smart objects,
1. the API
in order to add an object to a smart object you have to do
_member_add(o, s) and to delete _member_del(o,s). On the code of both
an evas smart object actually stores the members on a list but theres
no function to retrieve
Hi all,
i have some doubts-ideas about evas smart objects,
Ah yes, the saga of the evas smart object.
1. the API
in order to add an object to a smart object you have to do
_member_add(o, s) and to delete _member_del(o,s). On the code
of both an evas smart object
On Mon, 19 Jun 2006 02:55:36 GMT [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2. the implementation
ive been playing with smart objects for evoak, so ill explain
I thought evoak was considered to be laid to rest?
No, it was just sleeping. B-)
There has been a great desire
