Xynth as GUI. - Minix

This is a discussion on Xynth as GUI. - Minix ; What do you think about of http://www.xynth.org/ , it's lightweight, writen on pure C and has compability APIs for SDL, GTK, take a look at features http://www.xynth.org/features.php ....

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: Xynth as GUI.

  1. Xynth as GUI.

    What do you think about of http://www.xynth.org/, it's lightweight,
    writen on pure C and has compability APIs for SDL, GTK, take a look at
    features http://www.xynth.org/features.php.


  2. Re: Xynth as GUI.

    intelec wrote:
    > What do you think about of http://www.xynth.org/, it's lightweight,
    > writen on pure C and has compability APIs for SDL, GTK, take a look at
    > features http://www.xynth.org/features.php.


    It certainly looks like a nice non-X GUI system. Frankly this does seem
    to mesh better with the Minix philosophy than X11 does, but a Minix
    display target would need to be added, as the code in there currently
    only supports Linux and Windows (and maybe DOS using some of the funky
    just-enough-win32-binary-support-to-provide-DirectDraw-and SDL-support
    TSRs that are floating around). Still this looks to be the most
    complete low-fat X11 replacement I've seen (props for it's ability to
    host real, already-written apps like the GIMP, Xchat, Ltris and more.


  3. Re: Xynth as GUI.

    I write a email to the developers of Xynth asking if they can port it
    to Minix, maybe the found interesting, we will see if its true. However
    I think that Small it's beutiful and small good OS with a small good
    GUI makes sense for me.


  4. Re: Xynth as GUI.

    Alper Akcan from the Xynth project replay to my email and for your
    knowledge copy that replay:

    From: Alper Akcan
    To: Ivan Morales - Telecomunicaciones
    Sent: Sun, 1 Oct 2006 14:20:46 -0700 (PDT)
    Subject: Re: Port to Minix.

    > hi,
    >
    > i'am glad you liked xynth, thanks. i did not play with minix, but i
    > think that porting xynth to minix is an easy cake. at this point i
    > should ask you that, how can i install and test minix os, especially
    > does it work with any emulators like qemu, vmware, etc? but for the
    > porting process i need to install and operate minix directly on my
    > pc. can you guide me to the correct documents and sources?
    >
    > and let me say that, porintg xynth will give us "just" the windowing
    > system, and ability to work on diffferent overlapping, rectangular,
    > and seperated surfaces -as this is all what a windowing system
    > should do-. after launcinhg xynth, or any other windowing system,
    > people will be looking for a powerfull, and easy to use "widget sub
    > system" -that is consisting buttons, layouts, text areas, edit boxes,
    > etc.". have you any plan for this? if people want to open firefox,
    > kde, gnome, or any thing else related with the X windowing system,
    > then porting the xserver will be much more promissing.
    >
    > cheers,
    > alper.



  5. Re: Xynth as GUI.

    > From: Alper Akcan

    >> after launcinhg xynth, or any other windowing system,
    >> people will be looking for a powerfull, and easy to use "widget sub
    >> system" -that is consisting buttons, layouts, text areas, edit boxes,
    >> etc.". have you any plan for this?


    Is there any hope in porting or using FLTK? It is light and fast, though
    maybe a bit ugly? It is LGPL.

    http://www.fltk.org/

    I hope that, whatever widget toolkit people pick, it should take care to
    act stylish. That means, a window asking the user a yes/no question
    should not be resizeable, but instead have a fixed size that allows all
    the contents to fit nicely.

    And how about the now dead Y window system? Is this something comparable
    to xynth?

    http://www.y-windows.org/

    -Kimmo S.
    --
    A broad path is not a broad heart, but a broad conscience.

  6. Re: Xynth as GUI.

    All,

    On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 20:07:35 +0300, Kimmo Sundqvist wrote:
    > Is there any hope in porting or using FLTK?


    Yes, because it has been

    =Ben



  7. Re: Xynth as GUI.


    "intelec" wrote in message
    news:1158795463.599420.238270@h48g2000cwc.googlegr oups.com...
    > What do you think about of http://www.xynth.org/, it's lightweight,
    > writen on pure C and has compability APIs for SDL, GTK, take a look at
    > features http://www.xynth.org/features.php.



    Personally, I think it's a mistake to re-infect Minix with GPL, but that's
    just
    me.

    Tony



  8. Re: Xynth as GUI.

    Tony wrote:
    > "intelec" wrote in message
    > news:1158795463.599420.238270@h48g2000cwc.googlegr oups.com...
    >> What do you think about of http://www.xynth.org/, it's lightweight,
    >> writen on pure C and has compability APIs for SDL, GTK, take a look at
    >> features http://www.xynth.org/features.php.

    >
    >
    > Personally, I think it's a mistake to re-infect Minix with GPL, but that's
    > just
    > me.
    >
    > Tony
    >
    >

    Tony -> killfile (bigger troll/bigot than myself)


    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
    Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

    iD8DBQFFOZvzsjeOFtd+nycRAr41AJ0aJmbjm6JHZktkIqZa5X Hd4/AFqwCeLjb0
    RxnF7SFE7nQuVWIGvjLwqXE=
    =NuxC
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


  9. Re: Xynth as GUI.

    If you can't see how Minix was held back by licensing issues in the past,
    well there's no help for you then. I'm a developer and wouldn't touch GPL
    code with a 20 foot pole. If _you_ like it, well power to ya then. To each
    his/her own.

    Tony


    "Segin" wrote in message
    news:TZg_g.654$vC1.188@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...



  10. Re: Xynth as GUI.

    All,

    > Personally, I think it's a mistake to re-infect Minix with GPL, but that's
    > just
    > me.


    If it's a 3rd-party package, that's no issue - there are plenty of
    GPLled packages distributed with Minix already. Good ones, even

    =Ben



  11. Re: Xynth as GUI.


    "Ben Gras" wrote in message
    news:slrnejl1of.dgf.beng@keg.few.vu.nl...
    > All,
    >
    >> Personally, I think it's a mistake to re-infect Minix with GPL, but
    >> that's
    >> just
    >> me.

    >
    > If it's a 3rd-party package, that's no issue - there are plenty of
    > GPLled packages distributed with Minix already. Good ones, even


    If it was just an application program like a word processor or similar that
    would be one thing. But something that could potentially become part of the
    OS is entirely another thing (IMO). The world doesn't need yet another GPL
    Unix clone (IMO), or even any other GPL OS! As I recall reading, A.
    Tanenbaum
    faught hard to free the Minix sources. What a shame it would be if the GPL
    viri got their slimey lil tentacles around it.

    Tony



  12. Re: Xynth as GUI.


    "Tony" writes:

    > "intelec" wrote in message
    > news:1158795463.599420.238270@h48g2000cwc.googlegr oups.com...
    > > What do you think about of http://www.xynth.org/, it's lightweight,
    > > writen on pure C and has compability APIs for SDL, GTK, take a look at
    > > features http://www.xynth.org/features.php.

    >
    >


    > Personally, I think it's a mistake to re-infect Minix with GPL, but
    > that's just me.


    "re-infect"? Care to explain?

    Regards - Markus


  13. Re: Xynth as GUI.


    "M E Leypold"
    wrote in message news:c1hcxwinrp.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de...
    >
    > "Tony" writes:
    >
    >> "intelec" wrote in message
    >> news:1158795463.599420.238270@h48g2000cwc.googlegr oups.com...
    >> > What do you think about of http://www.xynth.org/, it's lightweight,
    >> > writen on pure C and has compability APIs for SDL, GTK, take a look at
    >> > features http://www.xynth.org/features.php.

    >>
    >>

    >
    >> Personally, I think it's a mistake to re-infect Minix with GPL, but
    >> that's just me.

    >
    > "re-infect"? Care to explain?


    Previously, Minix was encumbered by a restrictive license that most likely
    held back its development. Applying another restrictive licesnse like the
    GPL
    would probably keep it from being developed again. Since a GUI is an actual
    part of the system, I would steer clear of restrictive licensing. Of course
    I am
    assuming that there will be ONE GUI standard for Minix to avoid the fiasco
    of
    free Unix (too many GUIs, few standards) and that makes it more important
    than
    free Unix where the GUI is more like an application program (a mistake if
    you
    ask me). The other assumption I am making is that without Minix being
    lucrative
    to commercial development (and that pretty much means GPL is out), that it
    will
    just be a hobby OS and will never evolve to its potential.

    Tony



+ Reply to Thread