Re: Portability?

faq
flatforty
contribute
subscribe
configure
search
rdf

main
parent
thread

Re: Portability?
by Brandybuck on Thursday 05/Jan/2006, @00:30

It seems that Solid is trying to specify a standard, but Solid isn't a standard. What if the underlying platform doesn't choose to accept the imposition of that standard? What if a platform decides it likes another desktop and decides not to implement any of those kernel features Solid tells it to? What if some kindly soul at KDE writes those features, but that platform won't accept them?

This is a concern to me for two reasons. First, I don't use Linux. Second, I refuse to use proprietary video drivers. Will KDE be fully functional for me? If not, I'll be moving to a different desktop.

Related Links

·   Articles on Developer
·   Also by Brandybuck
·   Contact author

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )

Re: Portability?
by Christian Loose on Thursday 05/Jan/2006, @01:49

a) Solid is an API for device/network detection and hardware information. It's features are provided through backends like HAL.

b) If the platform decides not offer any hardware probing features in its kernel, it's there problem, right?

c) If the platform does offer the needed kernel features, it just a matter of either porting HAL or writing a new backend for Solid. Solid neither specifies the implementation nor the API of those kernel features. This is all handled by the Solid backend.

d) I'm sure KDE will also function on platforms that don't provide the necessary functionality. You will just miss certain features.

e) Solid features have *nothing* to do with proprietary video drivers

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: Portability?
by Brandybuck on Thursday 05/Jan/2006, @10:10

This is why that quote is so confusing, because it is stating that the backends must conform to the Solid specification. In other words, a platform can provide sufficient hardware probing features, but Solid won't use them because they didn't follow the Solid specification. Hopefully that's not what their portability definition means, but that is how it is written.

p.s. Sorry about the video driver reference. I had recently read about XGL only supporting proprietary drivers, and I conflated the two hardware issues in my mind.

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: Portability?
by Greg on Friday 06/Jan/2006, @11:16

Well, if there are hardware probing features that don't do what Solid needs, then no it may not support the platform. If it's just that the platform doesn't do things in the exact same way as Linux does, then that's the purpose of Solid. Systems like solid and hal are just a way to let people developing application ignore the specifics of an individual OS, just like QT mostly allows you to ignore whether your app is for Windows, Mac OSX, or Linux.

Solid wouldn't be saying exactly how the platform has to behave, it just specifies what information it needs to be able to get somehow to work properly. Some OS's may be more efficient about providing it than others though.

[ Reply To This | View ]

The Fine Print: The previous comments are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )


		"I didn't know there was a superlative of 'Warmduscher'." -- Carsten Pfeiffer
KDE®, "K Desktop Environment", "KDE Dot News", "got the dot?" and the KDE Logo® are trademarks or registered trademarks of KDE e.V. in the European Union, the United States and other countries. All other trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the poster. The rest: Copyright © 2000-2008 KDE e.V. for The KDE Project. For further information or comments on this site, please contact the Webmaster.