[Development] Fixing input for eglfs and friends

Girish Ramakrishnan girish at forwardbias.in
Fri May 25 15:52:16 CEST 2012

Hi Jorgen,

On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 11:12 PM, Jørgen Lind <jorgen.lind at nokia.com> wrote:
>> I think that's a valid point :-) They are all inside qtbase because of
>> convenience. The build system wasn't and still isn't very friendly
>> when it comes to creating separate modules.
> I honestly dont understand this point. And why does it have to be a
> submodule. Cant it just be a git repo with a qmake file, that builds the
> target to the same place where it would have been built in source?

I take the comment about the build system back :) I should have said
they are all inside qtbase "presumably" because of convenience. I was
just pointing out that windows, cocoa, xcb all inside qtbase.

>> I sort of agree with you and Jorgen. For eglfs, I have to point out
>> that the code there doesn't work on most boards out there since mostly
>> all boards need specific graphics initialization. So, yes, it's an
>> example and one that didn't work for me in most places :-) I also
>> added a eglfs/x11 backend sometime back to test in my laptop with
>> mesa.
>> I don't mind creating a separate submodule to carry out the proper qpa
>> plugin work. Would you be OK with:
>> a. Giving us the eglfs plugin name :-) This is mostly for our
>> convenience. We spent quite sometime educating people to use eglfs
>> right from the Qt4 days.
>> b. I will create a eglexample plugin that is basically eglfs without
>> the complexity of hooks, cursors etc. It will load input plugins as it
>> does today
>> c. After 5.0, I will move eglfs into a separate repo like wayland..
>> Sounds ok to you guys ?
> Ok, as I understand it, there will never be a Qt on pi plugin, nor a Qt
> on snowball etc etc plugin. You guys just want one plugin. And you want
> eglfs.

That's correct. We will never have a Qt QPA plugin for each board.
It's not required. EGLFS with (lots of) hooks suffice. Just like the
hardware_integration/ of wayland.

> Yeah, maybe we should just add minimal_egl or smoething, and keep evolving
> eglfs in the direction you guys see fit?

Yes, agree. I will create a change request for this.


More information about the Development mailing list