SDL in Redhat 6.2/What else needs to be done?

I just read on slashdot that Red Hat 6.2 contains a package for SDL in
the
powertools section. Well done, folks! Total domination is near. I wonder
what version it is.

On a side note, what more needs to be done (in Sam’s opinion, and that
of
everybody else) before we could turn the 1.1.x development tree into a
stable 1.2.0? Just curious, because usually people don’t distribute
"unstable" versions with their distributions, and I’m sure we all want
to be
able to use SDL with full OpenGL support, amongst other things. Anyways,
here’s my list of the most obvious things, as well as any additional
notes:
– clean up SVGAlib code (working on this)
– integrate OpenGL drivers for svgamesa and fxmesa (I’m not working
on
this. Could be, though)
– deal with G400 problems (Jim Duchek has found the problem; I
don’t
know if he contributed a patch. Who did that, anyways?!)
– SDL man pages (or info pages)
– XFree86 DGA 2.0 stuff (I’m not going to upgrade to 4.0 until all
the
driver issues are dealt with)
– the testgl demo looks butt ugly, and could do with a decent
perspective.
– de-kludging that audio makefile. (or at least doing something to
see
if we can avoid causing alarm)

You can tell that I mainly deal with the graphical side of my game,
right?
Did anybody ever post that wishlist anywhere?

I also wonder if it’d be a good idea to do sort of what OpenPTC does…
it
gives you a “demos” subdirectory as well as a test subdirectory. (Yes I
know
there are all those cool thingies up on the web page, but it’d be nice
to
have something that actually shows it off included with the SDL
distribution, or perhaps split up (a la Mesa?)) The idea being that at
present the “documentation” doesn’t really show off advanced coding
techniques. In fact, it’s really quite skimpy. If we did something like
this, we could show off all of the neat tricks.

Everybody knows that I’m working on the windowing thing. Well, I’m
loathe to
do it until we have a stable 1.2 with DGA 2.0, and until all the current
code is cleaned up. (I’m presuming that development #'s work like
Mesa… am
I wrong?)

Oh well. Enough of a diatribe. (This time it IS a diatribe, for those in
#SDL) Goodnight!

Nicholas–
Nicholas Vining “While you’re out there struggling
vining at pacificcoast.net with your computer, I’m naked,
icq: 20872003 clueless, and feeling good!”
- Ratbert

-- deal with G400 problems (Jim Duchek has found the problem; I

don’t
know if he contributed a patch. Who did that, anyways?!)

Don’t know but Jim Duchek found the problem and described it on the GLX
list. It is a simple s/SDL/GFX/; in one line :wink: BTW, no further problems
with a G400 card I am aware of (the colormap hack in the X code is not
required with 3.3.6).–
Daniel Vogel My opinions may have changed,
666 @ http://grafzahl.de but not the fact that I am right

– SDL man pages (or info pages)

Not that my opinion counts for everything,but I prefer man pages… :-)–
Brian

On a side note, what more needs to be done (in Sam’s opinion, and that
of everybody else) before we could turn the 1.1.x development tree into a
stable 1.2.0?

  • The BeOS fullscreen code needs quite a bit of improvement.
  • Win32 joystick input isn’t implemented using DirectInput yet.
  • I was going to implement config variables to replace env variable tweaking.
  • Adding YUV support
  • Adding DGA 2.0 support

I think those are the biggest issues.

Environment variables, YUV and DGA 2.0 can easily be put into the next
unstable revision if there’s a lot of demand for a stable 1.2 release,
but the Win32 joystick and BeOS fullscreen code needs to be fixed.

-- deal with G400 problems (Jim Duchek has found the problem; I

don’t
know if he contributed a patch. Who did that, anyways?!)

Yep, it’s fixed in the latest CVS code.

-- XFree86 DGA 2.0 stuff (I'm not going to upgrade to 4.0 until all

the
driver issues are dealt with)

Yep, wait for the next patch from XFree.

-- de-kludging that audio makefile. (or at least doing something to

see
if we can avoid causing alarm)

That would be nice. :slight_smile:

Did anybody ever post that wishlist anywhere?

Not yet. Is it completed?

I also wonder if it’d be a good idea to do sort of what OpenPTC does…
it
gives you a “demos” subdirectory as well as a test subdirectory.

SDL used to have a demos directory. There became so many of them that
most of the demos have been migrated to the SDL demos page:

http://www.devolution.com/~slouken/SDL/demos.html

Everybody knows that I’m working on the windowing thing. Well, I’m
loathe to
do it until we have a stable 1.2 with DGA 2.0, and until all the current
code is cleaned up.

I’m loath to do it period. :slight_smile:
What is more appealing to me is adding a transparent mask to the display
surface (for shaped windows) and then implementing a windowing library
on top of a framebuffer. This would be much more portable, anyway.
… QT anyone? :slight_smile:

See ya!
-Sam Lantinga (slouken at devolution.com)

Lead Programmer, Loki Entertainment Software–
“Any sufficiently advanced bug is indistinguishable from a feature”
– Rich Kulawiec

– the testgl demo looks butt ugly, and could do with a decent
perspective.

I think it would be useful to have a more comprehensive test suite/program
for testing new drivers/modifications in a rather more organised way than
the current test programs. It doesn’t have to be very sophisticated, just
display what is supposed to happen when it draws something.

Me too, info is evil, you can’t even use your own favorite pager :wink:
But, more serious, would people want sdl-manpages ? We have manpages for
printf() and strcmp(), why not have them for SDL_BlitSurface() too ?
I think that could be nicer than the html-docs in some situations.
Or perhaps have SDL_video.1 and SDL_events.1 etc ?
And, how are manpages written ? Do you directly write those groff-things or
are they usualy converted from something else ? Any pointers ?

All the best,
robOn Tue, Mar 28, 2000 at 03:19:31PM -0600, hayward at slothmud.org wrote:

– SDL man pages (or info pages)

Not that my opinion counts for everything, but I prefer man pages… :slight_smile:

Me too, info is evil, you can’t even use your own favorite pager :wink:
But, more serious, would people want sdl-manpages ? We have manpages for
printf() and strcmp(), why not have them for SDL_BlitSurface() too ?
I think that could be nicer than the html-docs in some situations.
Or perhaps have SDL_video.1 and SDL_events.1 etc ?
And, how are manpages written ? Do you directly write those groff-things or
are they usualy converted from something else ? Any pointers ?

I would find the following layout very useful:

man sdlaudio
man sdlevents
man sdlcdrom

Which was basically a function list.

Then

man SDL_BlitSurface
for more details.–
Brian

And, how are manpages written ? Do you directly write those groff-things or
are they usualy converted from something else ? Any pointers ?

Man pages reproduce by cloning. Most people take a working man page
— cat(1), say — and modify it by replacing the text but largely keeping
the structure.

Sam Lantinga wrote:

Everybody knows that I’m working on the windowing thing. Well, I’m
loathe to do it until we have a stable 1.2 with DGA 2.0, and until all
the current code is cleaned up. (I’m presuming that development #'s
work like Mesa… am I wrong?)

You should keep the windowing stuff for 1.3, IMHO.–
Pierre Phaneuf
Systems Exorcist

Thought so :slight_smile:
But there also exist at least some docs, as I just found out.
There’s man(7), although man(1) doesn’t mention it. And there’s
a Man-Page-mini-howto at the LDP.

I put together some example-manpages, which you can get at:
http://titan.cs.bonn.edu/~linden/sdlman.tar.gz
They conform to the hierarchy

  • sdl
    • sdlvideo
      • sdlgetvideoinfo
      • sdlgetvideosurface
    • sdlevents
      • sdlpumpevents
    • sdlopengl

Please tell me wether you think that such manpages would be useful,
and if so, what should be included/left out/changed/reformatted/etc. .
Also, of course, if somebody else is already working on manpages, we
could combine efforts.

All the best,
robOn Wed, Mar 29, 2000 at 01:14:45AM +0200, Mattias Engdeg?rd wrote:

Man pages reproduce by cloning. Most people take a working man page
— cat(1), say — and modify it by replacing the text but largely keeping
the structure.

– SDL man pages (or info pages)

Not that my opinion counts for everything,but I prefer man pages… :slight_smile:

As do I. Really, info’s quite a nasty piece of work in terms of user
useability… like most GNU tools, very powerful, but a pain in the noggin
to use.

Brian

Nicholas

Nicholas Vining “While you’re out there struggling
vining at pacificcoast.net with your computer, I’m naked,
icq: 20872003 clueless, and feeling good!”
- Ratbert

----- Original Message -----
From: hayward at slothmud.org (hayward@slothmud.org)
To: sdl at lokigames.com
Date: Tuesday, March 28, 2000 1:32 PM
Subject: Re: [SDL] SDL in Redhat 6.2/What else needs to be done?

On a side note, what more needs to be done (in Sam’s opinion, and that
of everybody else) before we could turn the 1.1.x development tree into a
stable 1.2.0?

I’m doing some serious work on the MacOS networking, though that’s not
really part of the main SDL code…

-Roy