[Spice-devel] Try to port spicec into Android
Attila Sukosd
attila.sukosd at gmail.com
Wed Mar 9 02:22:49 PST 2011
Could you maybe give access to other devs to aid the development?
Rgrds,
Attila
On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 11:18 AM, Shuxiang Lim <shohyanglim at gmail.com> wrote:
> Yep, I walked around this but to face more chored and nasty troubles in
> porting Pulseaudio lib, time limited, so I decided to DISABLE the
> audio(playback/record) channels first. Thus the porting of libspicec_glib.so
> is finished(along with all its dependences) and androidVNCViewer(whose UI
> will be peeled to become spicec's) proj. has been built:
> *#file libspicec_glib.so *
> libspicec_glib.so: ELF 32-bit LSB shared object, ARM, version 1 (SYSV),
> dynamically linked, not stripped
> *#arm-eabi-readelf -d libspicec_glib.so *
> Dynamic section at offset 0x774a4 contains 27 entries:
> Tag Type Name/Value
> 0x00000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libc.so]
> 0x00000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libm.so]
> 0x00000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libpixman-1.so.0]
> 0x00000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libssl.so.1.0.0]
> 0x00000001 (NEEDED) Shared library:
> [libcrypto.so.1.0.0]
> 0x00000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libjpeg.so.62]
> 0x00000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libz.so]
> 0x00000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libglib-2.0.so.0]
> 0x00000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libgio-2.0.so.0]
> 0x00000001 (NEEDED) Shared library:
> [libgobject-2.0.so.0]
> 0x00000001 (NEEDED) Shared library:
> [libgmodule-2.0.so.0]
> 0x00000001 (NEEDED) Shared library:
> [libgthread-2.0.so.0]
> 0x00000010 (SYMBOLIC) 0x0
> ....
> Now comes the last adventure of Native interfaces exposing and UI building!
> Regards.
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 3:57 PM, Shuxiang Lim <shohyanglim at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Well, I think I may try the "--with-coroutine=gthread" in spice-gtk
>> configuring to walk around that...
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 11:10 AM, Shuxiang Lim <shohyanglim at gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,I need help!
>>> Now I've managed to divided spicec-gtk into two parts
>>> libspicec.so(based on libpixman.so,libglib-2.0.so...No relation to X11 at
>>> all) and spicec(based on libspicec.so and libgtk.so...). And the glib2.0
>>> porting to Android is also completed. But I'm blocked in compiling libspicec
>>> onto Android at the begining for the continuation.c uses the functions in
>>> <ucontext.h> :setcontext(),getcontext()..., which are some thread-related
>>> funcs as I know,and, definitely unsuprisingly, Android libc doesn't have
>>> them! Is there a way to drop or replace the use of such funcs? Or should I
>>> manually write setcontext from scratch?
>>> RGRDs.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 5:14 PM, Alon Levy <alevy at redhat.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 09:08:28AM +0800, Shuxiang Lim wrote:
>>>> > Option 1: use spice-gtk with a gtk android backend
>>>> > a) compiling gtk for it would be possible.
>>>> > b) write a partial gtk backend, good enough for spice-gtk.
>>>> > c) no changes to spice-gtk.
>>>> > Yep,that's really a good hope,but it's another project(too huge and
>>>> far
>>>> > away for me now):
>>>> > Project:"GTK for Android.". So now I can use only the Android SDK to
>>>> finish
>>>> > the UI(the new native UI APIs in NDK is not reliable in versions).
>>>>
>>>> Yeah, I think you're right, I can't find anyone already working on this
>>>> by
>>>> simple web search. Maybe spice-gtk's non ui objects are dependent only
>>>> on
>>>> gobject / stuff that is easy to just drop in (ugly, but still more
>>>> maintainable
>>>> then basing your work on spicec, long term).
>>>>
>>>> > And also you've referred that "spicec is already platform
>>>> independent",
>>>> > that's true to Linux and Windows,but not to Android,for such
>>>> independence is
>>>> > based on the C++ independence over the os which cannot stand through
>>>> the
>>>> > JAVA UIed android.So there is no way to just add a subdir ./android
>>>> under
>>>> > spice/client along with ./x11 and ./windows. It should be a combined
>>>> proj.
>>>> > of C/C++ and Java. (That's why I hate Android and yearn for
>>>> Maemo/Meego.)
>>>>
>>>> Definitely easier to port to Maemo :)
>>>>
>>>> > Regards.
>>>> >
>>>> > On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 7:04 PM, Alon Levy <alevy at redhat.com> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > > On Fri, Mar 04, 2011 at 06:21:19PM +0800, Shuxiang Lim wrote:
>>>> > > > Hi, friends,
>>>> > > > Thanks for your replies. It's definitely right till now I've
>>>> been
>>>> > > > working a tougher way compared to spice-gtk.And actually I've
>>>> considered
>>>> > > to
>>>> > > > steer my way to the latter in fear of the troublesome and crippled
>>>> C++
>>>> > > > support in Android NDK:C is more "simple and safe" in Android than
>>>> C++.
>>>> > > > But,AFAIK,there is no gtk port for Android yet. And the biggest
>>>> obstacle
>>>> > > is
>>>> > > > the framework of Android:in its design,all UI should be done in
>>>> JAVA
>>>> > > powered
>>>> > > > by SKIA libs.Therefore the port of UI libs(GTK,etc) will be choked
>>>> by the
>>>> > > > I/O level because Android don't completely expose them at all!(I
>>>> once
>>>> > > > managed to port Xfbdev onto it,but that's not commercially
>>>> practical at
>>>> > > all,
>>>> > > > it's just a geeky trick maybe,an app in Android SHOULD NOT do
>>>> this.) Only
>>>> > > > the algorithm/data computing-related C/C++ libs are welcomed to be
>>>> the
>>>> > > JNI
>>>> > > > servants to JAVA UI apps in Android.
>>>> > > > You see, in such aspect, there is not too much diff between the
>>>> C++
>>>> > > way
>>>> > > > and gtk way in the porting of UI part.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > I'm going to try to prove that wrong by grepping hoping it makes
>>>> sense, I
>>>> > > never
>>>> > > actually coded in gtk:
>>>> > >
>>>> > > $ git grep GObjectClass
>>>> > > gtk/channel-cursor.c: GObjectClass *gobject_class =
>>>> > > G_OBJECT_CLASS(klass);
>>>> > > gtk/channel-display.c: GObjectClass *gobject_class =
>>>> > > G_OBJECT_CLASS(klass);
>>>> > > gtk/channel-inputs.c: GObjectClass *gobject_class =
>>>> > > G_OBJECT_CLASS(klass);
>>>> > > gtk/channel-main.c: GObjectClass *gobject_class =
>>>> G_OBJECT_CLASS(klass);
>>>> > > gtk/channel-playback.c: GObjectClass *gobject_class =
>>>> > > G_OBJECT_CLASS(klass);
>>>> > > gtk/channel-record.c: GObjectClass *gobject_class =
>>>> > > G_OBJECT_CLASS(klass);
>>>> > > gtk/spice-audio.h: GObjectClass parent_class;
>>>> > > gtk/spice-channel.c: GObjectClass *gobject_class = G_OBJECT_CLASS
>>>> > > (klass);
>>>> > > gtk/spice-channel.h: GObjectClass parent_class;
>>>> > > gtk/spice-gstaudio.c: GObjectClass *gobject_class =
>>>> > > G_OBJECT_CLASS(klass);
>>>> > > gtk/spice-pulse.c: GObjectClass *gobject_class =
>>>> G_OBJECT_CLASS(klass);
>>>> > > gtk/spice-session.c: GObjectClass *gobject_class =
>>>> > > G_OBJECT_CLASS(klass);
>>>> > > gtk/spice-session.h: GObjectClass parent_class;
>>>> > > gtk/spice-widget.c: GObjectClass *gobject_class =
>>>> G_OBJECT_CLASS(klass);
>>>> > >
>>>> > > otoh:
>>>> > > U playa:spice-gtk alon (master)$ git grep --name-only GdkWindow
>>>> > > gtk/spice-widget-cairo.c
>>>> > > gtk/spice-widget.c
>>>> > >
>>>> > > (if you grep Window you get false negatives because of the
>>>> compression
>>>> > > window).
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Anyway, this is a lame attempt to prove the gtk stuff that does ui
>>>> (read:
>>>> > > uses X)
>>>> > > is separated in the code/architecture level :)
>>>> > >
>>>> > > > So for me the shining light of spicec-gtk is not in "GTK" but
>>>> in "C".
>>>> > > I
>>>> > > > dare not to say I'm clear about every nook in spicec at all. My
>>>> best hope
>>>> > > is
>>>> > > > that the IO in spicec shall be straight and succinct ,the inner
>>>> > > > graphic/sound computing(decompress,etc) shall have NO relation
>>>> with upper
>>>> > > UI
>>>> > > > libs at all, so I can pipe the Finished image flow into UI through
>>>> JNI
>>>> > > > interfaces and direct the user input backward. (That's why I can
>>>> borrow
>>>> > > the
>>>> > > > UI from AndroidVNCViewer)
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Yeah, I think it is generally so, but again, it's so in spice-gtk
>>>> too, and
>>>> > > that's
>>>> > > our only future supported client (*).
>>>> > >
>>>> > > (*) plans do change.
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > libspicec.so(do most jobs)
>>>> > > > <==finishedimages/audio>>===<<inputs==>spicec.java.ui(only UI)
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > Am I right? Is there any design that will frustrate this in spicec
>>>> or
>>>> > > > spice-gtk?
>>>> > >
>>>> > > spicec is already separated at the platform level, since it uses low
>>>> level
>>>> > > libraries directly, unlike spice-gtk (X and GDI). So you would
>>>> basically
>>>> > > be adding a platform/android.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > In gtk I really haven't done android development, ever, at least not
>>>> in the
>>>> > > C level, but I was hoping:
>>>> > > Option 1: use spice-gtk with a gtk android backend
>>>> > > a) compiling gtk for it would be possible.
>>>> > > b) write a partial gtk backend, good enough for spice-gtk.
>>>> > > c) no changes to spice-gtk.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Option 2 is of course to make spice-gtk also have platform
>>>> separation,
>>>> > > while
>>>> > > still using gtk/gobject for all stuff that would Just Work when
>>>> doing 1.a
>>>> > > (the
>>>> > > data structures, the signals, the macros, the introspection?).
>>>> > >
>>>> > > > Regards.
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 4:36 PM, Alon Levy <alevy at redhat.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > > On Fri, Mar 04, 2011 at 03:38:51PM +0800, Shuxiang Lim wrote:
>>>> > > > > > Hi all,
>>>> > > > > > I'm trying these days to port spicec into Android.But it's
>>>> a
>>>> > > rather
>>>> > > > > TOUGH
>>>> > > > > > way to go because the structure of spicec and android are
>>>> desperately
>>>> > > > > > inappropriate:the linux version of spicec is based on the
>>>> X11,which
>>>> > > is
>>>> > > > > not
>>>> > > > > > available in Android,thus the UI of spicec should be rewritten
>>>> from
>>>> > > > > > scratch...More troublesome is that the UI part and data part
>>>> in
>>>> > > current
>>>> > > > >
>>>> > > > > Haven't looked at your proposal below yet, but did you check the
>>>> > > spice-gtk
>>>> > > > > work? maybe it is easier to start from that? are gtk libraries
>>>> > > available on
>>>> > > > > android? not talking about X. spice-gtk has objects for
>>>> connection and
>>>> > > > > channels
>>>> > > > > that afaik don't do any output, that's separate from the actual
>>>> widget
>>>> > > that
>>>> > > > > uses X. Also, gtk 3 has backends - did anyone do a backend for
>>>> android?
>>>> > > > >
>>>> > > > > Since going forward we plan to ditch the spicec client, that
>>>> would be
>>>> > > > > really
>>>> > > > > preffered. Now that I see what you have planned it sounds good,
>>>> but
>>>> > > better
>>>> > > > > to use spice-gtk.
>>>> > > > >
>>>> > > > > of course that's not to say we won't love to see this working
>>>> anyway :)
>>>> > > > >
>>>> > > > > > spicec is entangled in the hierarchical system in C++! So my
>>>> plan is
>>>> > > > > this:
>>>> > > > > > first split the spicec into two parts,data and UI,transform
>>>> the data
>>>> > > part
>>>> > > > > > into libspicec.so;then rewrite the UI part in JAVA. Besides, I
>>>> should
>>>> > > > > also
>>>> > > > > > tinker some problems caused by the Crippled NDK C++ support
>>>> and the
>>>> > > Lamed
>>>> > > > > > bionic c lib in android .
>>>> > > > > > And now the first step is roughly done,hence the change of
>>>> the
>>>> > > spicec
>>>> > > > > > structure:
>>>> > > > > > From
>>>> > > > > >
>>>> > > |-->playback
>>>> > > > > > thread
>>>> > > > > >
>>>> > > |-->cursor
>>>> > > > > > thread
>>>> > > > > > spicec:spicec process（application process）-->main
>>>> thread->|-->*record
>>>> > > > > thread
>>>> > > > > > *
>>>> > > > > >
>>>> > > |-->inputs
>>>> > > > > > thread
>>>> > > > > >
>>>> > > |-->display
>>>> > > > > > thread
>>>> > > > > > To:
>>>> > > > > > ===========================>
>>>> > > > > > |-->libspicec.so:application
>>>> thread-->main
>>>> > > > > > thread------>|
>>>> > > > > > |
>>>> > > > > > |
>>>> > > > > > | |<--display thread<--|
>>>> > > > > > |
>>>> > > > > > | |--->|<--cursor
>>>> > > > > > thread<---|<------------------|
>>>> > > > > > | | |<--inputs thread<---|
>>>> > > > > > spicec:spicec process--->| | |<--playback thread<-|
>>>> > > > > > | |
>>>> > > > > > | |
>>>> > > > > > | |
>>>> > > > > > <---------------------------------------------|
>>>> > > > > > |
>>>> > > > > > |
>>>> > > > > > |
>>>> > > > > > |
>>>> > > > > > |-->spicec:platform
>>>> > > > > > thread------------------------------>|
>>>> > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > The hierarchical relationship has been unleashed with one
>>>> > > thread(record
>>>> > > > > > channel) deleted and two new threads (app and platform)
>>>> created. The
>>>> > > > > first
>>>> > > > > > as the "data thread",the other as the "work thread" which is
>>>> driven
>>>> > > by
>>>> > > > > the
>>>> > > > > > signals from the first thread as well as its sub threads and
>>>> > > requested to
>>>> > > > > do
>>>> > > > > > the UI-related work:
>>>> > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > platform thread：------------>blocked and waiting:-->job
>>>> > > > > > request-<--------------|
>>>> > > > > > | |
>>>> > > > > > |
>>>> > > > > > ^ |
>>>> > > > > > |
>>>> > > > > > |
>>>> > > > > > | |
>>>> > > > > > |<----------|-<-|
>>>> > > > > > |
>>>> > > > > > | |
>>>> > > > > > |
>>>> > > > > > platform thread over<----------if(job==die)<--| send
>>>> req.
>>>> > > blocked
>>>> > > > > > and waiting
>>>> > > > > > | ^ |
>>>> > > > > > |
>>>> > > > > > | | |
>>>> > > > > > ^
>>>> > > > > > | | |
>>>> > > > > > _________|_________
>>>> > > > > > | | |
>>>> > > > > > | app/plbk/cusor
>>>> > > > > > thd
>>>> > > > > > |<---job done----dojob()<--else--| |
>>>> |->go
>>>> > > on->|
>>>> > > > > > __________________
>>>> > > > > > | |
>>>> > > > > > |------------------------------->feed back-->|
>>>> > > > > >
>>>> > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > So the next work is to expose the native JNI interface in
>>>> platform
>>>> > > thread
>>>> > > > > to
>>>> > > > > > the UI written in Android SDK. I try to use the UI
>>>> > > > > > frame of AndroidVNCViewer in
>>>> > > > > > code.google.com/p/*android*-*vnc*-viewer/,then the work of
>>>> platform
>>>> > > > > > thread will be replaced by UI but the msg
>>>> > > > > > communication to libspicec will be remained. That's the
>>>> easiest way I
>>>> > > can
>>>> > > > > > envisage except rewriting all parts in spicec from scratch.
>>>> > > > > > It's tough too, for I have poor experiance in Java...
>>>> > > > > > Anyway, is there any other guy working on this? Is my way
>>>> > > > > feasible??Any
>>>> > > > > > Ideas or help is appreciated.
>>>> > > > >
>>>> > > > > See above for ideas, don't read them as a criticism, I think
>>>> this is
>>>> > > > > fantastic
>>>> > > > > what you've done so far. I remember someone posting "we are
>>>> working on
>>>> > > > > andriod
>>>> > > > > in our spare time" post to spice-devel, please grep the archive.
>>>> > > > >
>>>> > > > > Alon
>>>> > > > >
>>>> > > > > > Best regards.
>>>> > > > >
>>>> > > > > > _______________________________________________
>>>> > > > > > Spice-devel mailing list
>>>> > > > > > Spice-devel at lists.freedesktop.org
>>>> > > > > > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel
>>>> > > > >
>>>> > > > >
>>>> > >
>>>> > > > _______________________________________________
>>>> > > > Spice-devel mailing list
>>>> > > > Spice-devel at lists.freedesktop.org
>>>> > > > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel
>>>> > >
>>>> > >
>>>>
>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>> > Spice-devel mailing list
>>>> > Spice-devel at lists.freedesktop.org
>>>> > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Spice-devel mailing list
> Spice-devel at lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/spice-devel/attachments/20110309/c852e053/attachment-0001.htm>
More information about the Spice-devel
mailing list