On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 09:08:28AM +0800, Shuxiang Lim wrote: > Option 1: use spice-gtk with a gtk android backend > a) compiling gtk for it would be possible. > b) write a partial gtk backend, good enough for spice-gtk. > c) no changes to spice-gtk. > Yep,that's really a good hope,but it's another project(too huge and far > away for me now): > Project:"GTK for Android.". So now I can use only the Android SDK to finish > the UI(the new native UI APIs in NDK is not reliable in versions).
Yeah, I think you're right, I can't find anyone already working on this by simple web search. Maybe spice-gtk's non ui objects are dependent only on gobject / stuff that is easy to just drop in (ugly, but still more maintainable then basing your work on spicec, long term). > And also you've referred that "spicec is already platform independent", > that's true to Linux and Windows,but not to Android,for such independence is > based on the C++ independence over the os which cannot stand through the > JAVA UIed android.So there is no way to just add a subdir ./android under > spice/client along with ./x11 and ./windows. It should be a combined proj. > of C/C++ and Java. (That's why I hate Android and yearn for Maemo/Meego.) Definitely easier to port to Maemo :) > Regards. > > On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 7:04 PM, Alon Levy <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Fri, Mar 04, 2011 at 06:21:19PM +0800, Shuxiang Lim wrote: > > > Hi, friends, > > > Thanks for your replies. It's definitely right till now I've been > > > working a tougher way compared to spice-gtk.And actually I've considered > > to > > > steer my way to the latter in fear of the troublesome and crippled C++ > > > support in Android NDK:C is more "simple and safe" in Android than C++. > > > But,AFAIK,there is no gtk port for Android yet. And the biggest obstacle > > is > > > the framework of Android:in its design,all UI should be done in JAVA > > powered > > > by SKIA libs.Therefore the port of UI libs(GTK,etc) will be choked by the > > > I/O level because Android don't completely expose them at all!(I once > > > managed to port Xfbdev onto it,but that's not commercially practical at > > all, > > > it's just a geeky trick maybe,an app in Android SHOULD NOT do this.) Only > > > the algorithm/data computing-related C/C++ libs are welcomed to be the > > JNI > > > servants to JAVA UI apps in Android. > > > You see, in such aspect, there is not too much diff between the C++ > > way > > > and gtk way in the porting of UI part. > > > > I'm going to try to prove that wrong by grepping hoping it makes sense, I > > never > > actually coded in gtk: > > > > $ git grep GObjectClass > > gtk/channel-cursor.c: GObjectClass *gobject_class = > > G_OBJECT_CLASS(klass); > > gtk/channel-display.c: GObjectClass *gobject_class = > > G_OBJECT_CLASS(klass); > > gtk/channel-inputs.c: GObjectClass *gobject_class = > > G_OBJECT_CLASS(klass); > > gtk/channel-main.c: GObjectClass *gobject_class = G_OBJECT_CLASS(klass); > > gtk/channel-playback.c: GObjectClass *gobject_class = > > G_OBJECT_CLASS(klass); > > gtk/channel-record.c: GObjectClass *gobject_class = > > G_OBJECT_CLASS(klass); > > gtk/spice-audio.h: GObjectClass parent_class; > > gtk/spice-channel.c: GObjectClass *gobject_class = G_OBJECT_CLASS > > (klass); > > gtk/spice-channel.h: GObjectClass parent_class; > > gtk/spice-gstaudio.c: GObjectClass *gobject_class = > > G_OBJECT_CLASS(klass); > > gtk/spice-pulse.c: GObjectClass *gobject_class = G_OBJECT_CLASS(klass); > > gtk/spice-session.c: GObjectClass *gobject_class = > > G_OBJECT_CLASS(klass); > > gtk/spice-session.h: GObjectClass parent_class; > > gtk/spice-widget.c: GObjectClass *gobject_class = G_OBJECT_CLASS(klass); > > > > otoh: > > U playa:spice-gtk alon (master)$ git grep --name-only GdkWindow > > gtk/spice-widget-cairo.c > > gtk/spice-widget.c > > > > (if you grep Window you get false negatives because of the compression > > window). > > > > Anyway, this is a lame attempt to prove the gtk stuff that does ui (read: > > uses X) > > is separated in the code/architecture level :) > > > > > So for me the shining light of spicec-gtk is not in "GTK" but in "C". > > I > > > dare not to say I'm clear about every nook in spicec at all. My best hope > > is > > > that the IO in spicec shall be straight and succinct ,the inner > > > graphic/sound computing(decompress,etc) shall have NO relation with upper > > UI > > > libs at all, so I can pipe the Finished image flow into UI through JNI > > > interfaces and direct the user input backward. (That's why I can borrow > > the > > > UI from AndroidVNCViewer) > > > > Yeah, I think it is generally so, but again, it's so in spice-gtk too, and > > that's > > our only future supported client (*). > > > > (*) plans do change. > > > > > > libspicec.so(do most jobs) > > > <==finishedimages/audio>>===<<inputs==>spicec.java.ui(only UI) > > > > > > Am I right? Is there any design that will frustrate this in spicec or > > > spice-gtk? > > > > spicec is already separated at the platform level, since it uses low level > > libraries directly, unlike spice-gtk (X and GDI). So you would basically > > be adding a platform/android. > > > > In gtk I really haven't done android development, ever, at least not in the > > C level, but I was hoping: > > Option 1: use spice-gtk with a gtk android backend > > a) compiling gtk for it would be possible. > > b) write a partial gtk backend, good enough for spice-gtk. > > c) no changes to spice-gtk. > > > > Option 2 is of course to make spice-gtk also have platform separation, > > while > > still using gtk/gobject for all stuff that would Just Work when doing 1.a > > (the > > data structures, the signals, the macros, the introspection?). > > > > > Regards. > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 4:36 PM, Alon Levy <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 04, 2011 at 03:38:51PM +0800, Shuxiang Lim wrote: > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > I'm trying these days to port spicec into Android.But it's a > > rather > > > > TOUGH > > > > > way to go because the structure of spicec and android are desperately > > > > > inappropriate:the linux version of spicec is based on the X11,which > > is > > > > not > > > > > available in Android,thus the UI of spicec should be rewritten from > > > > > scratch...More troublesome is that the UI part and data part in > > current > > > > > > > > Haven't looked at your proposal below yet, but did you check the > > spice-gtk > > > > work? maybe it is easier to start from that? are gtk libraries > > available on > > > > android? not talking about X. spice-gtk has objects for connection and > > > > channels > > > > that afaik don't do any output, that's separate from the actual widget > > that > > > > uses X. Also, gtk 3 has backends - did anyone do a backend for android? > > > > > > > > Since going forward we plan to ditch the spicec client, that would be > > > > really > > > > preffered. Now that I see what you have planned it sounds good, but > > better > > > > to use spice-gtk. > > > > > > > > of course that's not to say we won't love to see this working anyway :) > > > > > > > > > spicec is entangled in the hierarchical system in C++! So my plan is > > > > this: > > > > > first split the spicec into two parts,data and UI,transform the data > > part > > > > > into libspicec.so;then rewrite the UI part in JAVA. Besides, I should > > > > also > > > > > tinker some problems caused by the Crippled NDK C++ support and the > > Lamed > > > > > bionic c lib in android . > > > > > And now the first step is roughly done,hence the change of the > > spicec > > > > > structure: > > > > > From > > > > > > > |-->playback > > > > > thread > > > > > > > |-->cursor > > > > > thread > > > > > spicec:spicec process（application process）-->main thread->|-->*record > > > > thread > > > > > * > > > > > > > |-->inputs > > > > > thread > > > > > > > |-->display > > > > > thread > > > > > To: > > > > > ===========================> > > > > > |-->libspicec.so:application thread-->main > > > > > thread------>| > > > > > | > > > > > | > > > > > | |<--display thread<--| > > > > > | > > > > > | |--->|<--cursor > > > > > thread<---|<------------------| > > > > > | | |<--inputs thread<---| > > > > > spicec:spicec process--->| | |<--playback thread<-| > > > > > | | > > > > > | | > > > > > | | > > > > > <---------------------------------------------| > > > > > | > > > > > | > > > > > | > > > > > | > > > > > |-->spicec:platform > > > > > thread------------------------------>| > > > > > > > > > > The hierarchical relationship has been unleashed with one > > thread(record > > > > > channel) deleted and two new threads (app and platform) created. The > > > > first > > > > > as the "data thread",the other as the "work thread" which is driven > > by > > > > the > > > > > signals from the first thread as well as its sub threads and > > requested to > > > > do > > > > > the UI-related work: > > > > > > > > > > platform thread：------------>blocked and waiting:-->job > > > > > request-<--------------| > > > > > | | > > > > > | > > > > > ^ | > > > > > | > > > > > | > > > > > | | > > > > > |<----------|-<-| > > > > > | > > > > > | | > > > > > | > > > > > platform thread over<----------if(job==die)<--| send req. > > blocked > > > > > and waiting > > > > > | ^ | > > > > > | > > > > > | | | > > > > > ^ > > > > > | | | > > > > > _________|_________ > > > > > | | | > > > > > | app/plbk/cusor > > > > > thd > > > > > |<---job done----dojob()<--else--| | |->go > > on->| > > > > > __________________ > > > > > | | > > > > > |------------------------------->feed back-->| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So the next work is to expose the native JNI interface in platform > > thread > > > > to > > > > > the UI written in Android SDK. I try to use the UI > > > > > frame of AndroidVNCViewer in > > > > > code.google.com/p/*android*-*vnc*-viewer/,then the work of platform > > > > > thread will be replaced by UI but the msg > > > > > communication to libspicec will be remained. That's the easiest way I > > can > > > > > envisage except rewriting all parts in spicec from scratch. > > > > > It's tough too, for I have poor experiance in Java... > > > > > Anyway, is there any other guy working on this? Is my way > > > > feasible??Any > > > > > Ideas or help is appreciated. > > > > > > > > See above for ideas, don't read them as a criticism, I think this is > > > > fantastic > > > > what you've done so far. I remember someone posting "we are working on > > > > andriod > > > > in our spare time" post to spice-devel, please grep the archive. > > > > > > > > Alon > > > > > > > > > Best regards. > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > Spice-devel mailing list > > > > > [email protected] > > > > > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Spice-devel mailing list > > > [email protected] > > > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Spice-devel mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel _______________________________________________ Spice-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel
