I have three questions concerning SDL:
-
Why isn’t it possible to build SDL as a static library? There’s
nothing wrong with dynamic libs, but as it stands, creating stand-alone
applications with SDL is a bit painful.
-
Is there a way to check whether the last screen update has completed?
This would be quite useful if the screen update runs in a separate
thread (as is obviously the case with MITSHM).
-
Wouldn’t it be nice to have a simple key delay/key repeat/key queue
facility built into SDL? Something like this is needed by a lot of
applications, and though it’s not really hard to implement, it’s still a
nuisance.
Cheers
Daniel
Mainly licensing, I believe. Since SDL is LGPL, it would “taint” your
code to static link it. Though it would be really nice to have a
way to make a real static version for those of us that don’t care if
our code is tainted, or download non-GPL’d code and have no plans on
distributing the binaries but want it statically linked to make
suid-root happier.
(Dynamic linking does odd things with suid. Ick.)On Sun, Aug 01, 1999 at 12:36:29AM +0200, Daniel Heck wrote:
I have three questions concerning SDL:
- Why isn’t it possible to build SDL as a static library? There’s
nothing wrong with dynamic libs, but as it stands, creating stand-alone
applications with SDL is a bit painful.
–
Brian Moore | Of course vi is God’s editor.
Sysadmin, C/Perl Hacker | If He used Emacs, He’d still be waiting
Usenet Vandal | for it to load on the seventh day.
Netscum, Bane of Elves.
(Dynamic linking does odd things with suid. Ick.)
And not having libsdlx11.so (or whatever) show up in ldd makes it more of a
pain…
Maybe if we just assumed that major versions are binary compatible (and
include the version number in the name of the library on unintelligent OSs),
that problem could be simplified.
(And that’ll solve the problem of devel versions being treated as stable too ;)On Sat, Jul 31, 1999 at 04:29:54PM -0700, brian moore wrote:
–
– Michael Samuel
Anything said in this message is my employer’s fault, not mine; sue him.
- Why isn’t it possible to build SDL as a static library? There’s
nothing wrong with dynamic libs, but as it stands, creating stand-alone
applications with SDL is a bit painful.
But it is possible (dare I say more than that). A cursory look at the Makefile
will show you all the infrastructure that exists for it. You cut yourself off
from the swell run-time library loading, though.
m.On Sat, 31 Jul 1999, you wrote:
–
“How wonderful! How mysterious! Programmer
I carry wood! I draw water!” Loki Entertainment Software
- Why isn’t it possible to build SDL as a static library? There’s
nothing wrong with dynamic libs, but as it stands, creating stand-alone
applications with SDL is a bit painful.
Do “make static”
- Is there a way to check whether the last screen update has completed?
This would be quite useful if the screen update runs in a separate
thread (as is obviously the case with MITSHM).
When the SDL_UpdateRects() function returns, the lsat screen update has
completed.
- Wouldn’t it be nice to have a simple key delay/key repeat/key queue
facility built into SDL? Something like this is needed by a lot of
applications, and though it’s not really hard to implement, it’s still a
nuisance.
I’ll take a look at it. A lot of people have asked for it.
-Sam Lantinga (slouken at devolution.com)
Lead Programmer, Loki Entertainment Software–
“Any sufficiently advanced bug is indistinguishable from a feature”
– Rich Kulawiec
(Dynamic linking does odd things with suid. Ick.)
And not having libsdlx11.so (or whatever) show up in ldd makes it more of a
pain…
Maybe if we just assumed that major versions are binary compatible (and
include the version number in the name of the library on unintelligent OSs),
that problem could be simplified.
(And that’ll solve the problem of devel versions being treated as stable too 
I’m working on a new internal infrastructure that will allow you to compile
lots of front-end interfaces into SDL and it can dynamically pick between
them. This will get rid of a lot of the dynamic loading silliness, and
allow the first steps towards multi-heading support (monitor, keyboard,
sound card, etc.)
-Sam Lantinga (slouken at devolution.com)
Lead Programmer, Loki Entertainment Software> On Sat, Jul 31, 1999 at 04:29:54PM -0700, brian moore wrote:
“Any sufficiently advanced bug is indistinguishable from a feature”
– Rich Kulawiec
You also have to -D_SDL_STATIC_LIB in things you build, which seems to
be the ‘gotcha’ that was getting me. :)On Sun, Aug 01, 1999 at 08:21:48AM -0400, Michael K Vance wrote:
On Sat, 31 Jul 1999, you wrote:
- Why isn’t it possible to build SDL as a static library? There’s
nothing wrong with dynamic libs, but as it stands, creating stand-alone
applications with SDL is a bit painful.
But it is possible (dare I say more than that). A cursory look at the Makefile
will show you all the infrastructure that exists for it. You cut yourself off
from the swell run-time library loading, though.
–
Brian Moore | Of course vi is God’s editor.
Sysadmin, C/Perl Hacker | If He used Emacs, He’d still be waiting
Usenet Vandal | for it to load on the seventh day.
Netscum, Bane of Elves.