[Spice-devel] Try to port spicec into Android
Alon Levy
alevy at redhat.com
Wed Mar 9 02:26:24 PST 2011
On Wed, Mar 09, 2011 at 06:18:50PM +0800, Shuxiang Lim 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 *
Cool.
Just one thing - you keep saying spicec, the spicec is the name of the executable
and package for the old-and-planned-to-be-phased-out-non-glib-client, so you are
actually working with the spice-gtk repo now, right? git://gitorious.org/spice-gtk/spice-gtk.git?
> 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
More information about the Spice-devel
mailing list