Re: [MiNT] new VDI?

[Johan Klockars <rand@cd.chalmers.se>]

[Regarding VDI under GGI or the other way around]
> The question is perhaps which is more useful. Adapt GGI to VDI would
> make it possible to run GGI programs in TOS (or compatible). Adapt

It remains to be seen how much support there will be for GGI.
I really don't see any reason for application programs to be written for
it, but games and X servers are of course also interesting.

> fVDI to GGI would make it possible to run (natively compiled) VDI
> applications on any machine/environment supported by GGI.

Making fVDI call GGI functions instead of its own device drivers should
be a relatively simple matter, since they are essentially the same thing.
(Well, I haven't seen any of the GGI acceleration interfaces (that isn't
 documented on the normal pages as far as I can see), but since they solve
 the same problem they are likely to be rather similar.)
Much of the fVDI core (150kbyte or so) is currently written in assembly,
though, so porting it to another processor would take a bit of work.
Fortunately, much of that code is redundant (pixel by pixel versions of
things that would normally be handled by device drivers) or really simple
(like all the vq?_/vs?_ routines).

However, as I said before, I really think it would be better to do
something like that on top of X rather than GGI.
For example, that would make it possible to run VDI programs remote.

-- 
  Chalmers University   | Why are these |  e-mail:   rand@cd.chalmers.se
     of Technology      |  .signatures  |            johan@rand.thn.htu.se
                        | so hard to do |  WWW/ftp:  rand.thn.htu.se
   Gothenburg, Sweden   |     well?     |            (MGIFv5, QLem, BAD MOOD)