[Spice-devel] Try to port spicec into Android
Alon Levy
alevy at redhat.com
Fri Mar 18 02:15:50 PDT 2011
On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 02:09:38PM +0800, Shuxiang Lim wrote:
> Ok,my prediction is right, this segfault is solved by disabling NLS (the use
> of gettext(). etc..)in glib.
> Yet then Bus Error comes: I know,it's mainly caused by the typecast for ARM
> has no same alignment style as x86.The question is: is there a way to fix
> this in the arm-gcc option other than rewrite the typecast statements into
> memcpy()?(There are huge amount of such statements in glib.). The -O0 option
> doesnot work.
> Rgrds.
This is strange, as I know glib is used by maemo, running on n900, which is an arm.
No idea, sorry.
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 11:52 AM, Shuxiang Lim <shohyanglim at gmail.com>wrote:
>
> > Hi,all,caution of the radioactive rays!
> > I feel rather frustrated though...Now I have ported libglib2.0 and its
> > deps(libintl,libiconv...) onto android as well as libspicec-glib.so and
> > snappy.
> > But when run,the snappy got only SEGFAULT and killed.
> > *#LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/data/local/lib ./snappy -h 192.168.1.31 -p 5900 -o
> > ahoo.ppm*
> > *[1] + Stopped (signal) LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/data/local/lib ./snappy -h
> > 192.168.1.31 -p 5900 -o ahoo.ppm
> > [1] Segmentation fault LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/data/local/lib ./snappy -h
> > 192.168.1.31 -p 5900 -o ahoo.ppm*
> >
> > Tracing the process,I found the SEGFAULT came from the
> > glib:g_object_new()!:
> > gtk/spice-session.c:
> > addr = g_object_new (G_TYPE_NETWORK_ADDRESS, "hostname", s->host, "port",
> > port, NULL);
> > -->libgobject:gobject/gtype.c
> > g_object_new()-->g_type_class_ref()-->type_class_init_Wm()
> > -->libgio:gio/gnetworkaddress.c
> > g_network_address_class_init()-->CRASSSSHHHH.
> >
> > Now I'm still tracing the bug... It may come from the i18n string ops, but
> > if other bug occurs in glib,the future is dim... For I really has no time
> > and energy to hack the arcane and exotic glib(or it's caused by the
> > incorrect use of glib method in spicec?).(forgive such adjectives,to me,it's
> > true)
> > I really yearn for the spicec in PURE C and Modularized:
> > 1.Offer the switch to disable (do not POSIX-likedly depend on) locale,
> > libiconv, libintl, sys/shm.h, pwd.h, pthread,i18n, wchar_t,regex,gettext,...
> > for none of them can be found in android!
> > 2. Be as far away as we can from the other libs like the
> > glib/gtk,pulseaudio/alsalib...
> > 3. Completely modularize spicec into libspicec and spicec (this is what I
> > am working for)
> > as the data layer and the UI layer to ease the porting.
> >
> > Is there any plan about these now? Can anybody help to do the step 1 or
> > step 2 above?
> > Or, the simplest: the way to safely turn off locale and i18n in glib?
> > Pardon my whining and wish me Goodluck!
> > And again I shall desperately curse Android and bless Meego!
> > Regards.
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 9:07 AM, Shuxiang Lim <shohyanglim at gmail.com>wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> That's true. But the audio output as well as the image output is unexposed
> >> or disabled for C/C++ apps in Android.So I plan to dwindle the work to
> >> implement the image first,if success, the audio work will be easy to follow.
> >>
> >> Regards.
> >>
> >> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 6:22 PM, Attila Sukosd <attila.sukosd at gmail.com>wrote:
> >>
> >>> 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
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> 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