Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: What Interface Does Pdaxrom Use?
OESF Forums > Distros, Development, and Model Specific Forums > Distro Support and Discussion > pdaXrom
systemparadox
What interface does pdaXrom use by default? GPE? If so, what have they done to it? Has it been forked? It's completely different to the OZ version (which appears to be the official one)- it looks way better, but has major usability problems.

Thanks
Simon
Capn_Fish
PdaXrom uses X11 and Open/Matchbox by default. Unless I'm mistaken, GPE uses Matchbox as its base as well. You can add whatever desktop/window manager you want, though. Off the top of my head:

IceWM
Fluxbox
Blackbox
Xfce
KDE*
FVWM
EvilWM
Ratpoison

*Not the easiest or fastest way to go wink.gif
HoloVector
You forgot one of my favs

e17 cool.gif
systemparadox
Is it possible to put some of these on openzaurus? I want a 2.6 kernel, but GPE and Opie suck.
Meanie
QUOTE(systemparadox @ Jul 11 2007, 08:12 AM)
Is it possible to put some of these on openzaurus? I want a 2.6 kernel, but GPE and Opie suck.
*


openzaurus is dead and will be replaced by angstrom once that is finished...

ask the OZ developers if you want extra stuff for OZ but dont hold your breath since they all abandoned openzaurus for Angstrom...

btw, this is a pdaXrom thread. GPE is actually a nice set of libraries to make the GTK2 stuff more lightweight and more PDA friendly. its a pity though that the OZ developers are quite good at coding but their visual design skills are at the other end of the scale thus GPE looks ugly.

pdaXrom has a 2.6 kernel as well, but that is still work in progress...
systemparadox
I'm sure this is probably a stupid question, but why don't you just use the same kernel OZ does?

I think the main problem with embedded Linux- especially on the Zaurus is that everyone is working independantly.
Chero
QUOTE(systemparadox @ Jul 11 2007, 11:55 AM)
I'm sure this is probably a stupid question, but why don't you just use the same kernel OZ does?

I think the main problem with embedded Linux- especially on the Zaurus is that everyone is working independantly.
*


Check out the thread about the new kernel for pdaXrom, and you'll see that is exactly what the devs are trying to do, but some pdaX-things don't work (yet) with that kernel. So pdaXrom is using an older one.

There have been a lot of threads about "joining efforts" etc. but there are different point s of view so there will always be different roms ...
Different approaches give us a choice and a bit of (healthy) competition has never harmed anyone.

Chero.
systemparadox
QUOTE(Chero @ Jul 11 2007, 11:50 AM)
There have been a lot of threads about "joining efforts" etc. but there are different point s of view so there will always be different roms ...
Different approaches give us a choice and a bit of (healthy) competition has never harmed anyone.
*


Competition would be healthy, but embedded development doesn't seem to be working anything like it does with desktops.
On my desktop machine I can go to the project page for any piece of software, download, compile and install regardless of what distro I am using (and make the relevant type of package for it if I wish).

With my Zaurus it seems that the software, especially the GUI (WHY!?!) is tied to the specific distro (this sounding like the Windows problem to anyone else?).

What needs to be done is every ROM should come with a working compiler, assembler and make, and each software project should be independent of any distro. Also, I should be able to get the standard mainstream sources for any desktop package and have it work on the Zaurus. We should not be forking all these packages- especially the kernel. I should be able to go to kernel.org and compile the latest version on my Z, and if it doesn't work on my Z for any reason then that's a bug and should be marked and fixed as such.

Also, flashing=bad. Every decent desktop distro has it's packages on rolling updates, instead of waiting for the next release to update everything (again- doesn't this sound too much like the Windows way of doing things?).

I appreciate that I don't know much about software development and the problems facing the embedded developers, but I believe that this is the reason we are in the state we are now. The Zaurii are capable of the same as desktop machines- that should include the way the software on them is managed. If we can sort out this mess we will unlock the true power of the Zaurii.
adf
pdaxii13 already does a lot of that--native compiling, multiple guis, staightforward upgrades...

hopefully some joint work on common elements will speed things along. with all development
T3_slider
The fact is, the Z isn't a desktop machine. It has taken many many years for that simplicity to work on desktops and that simplicity is mainly for x86 processors (although not necessarily). The Z has an ARM processor, so everything must be recompiled. Since the Z user base is MUCH less than the desktop user base, it is unrealistic to imagine that it would work exactly the same. The effort required to merge all efforts and create a system with rolling updates and kernels that just work once compiled without extensive patching etc. would be enormous. OE is actually doing a great job trying to reach this kind of simplicity, but pdaXrom has more user simplicity (ie I know how to use desktop Linux so I also know how to use pdaXrom without much of a learning curve at all).

I'm one of those people that prefer the competition -- not simply because competition gets good results, but because I don't want to be forced into having one thing. Although I'm currently using beta 3, I think the 2.6 kernel pdaXrom releases can get a lot out of uboot -- for example booting off an SD card etc. I also think it's great that Angstrom can do a heck of a lot without requiring uboot, but does it differently. It's all about choice. Not everyone wants the same things, and even if there was one ROM (or even one kernel), the Z will never be as simplistic as a desktop -- there is far too much effort for the relatively small number of Z developers.

Sorry to poop on your ideas, but I just don't think the Z will ever be THAT simplistic considering it's a niche product with few developers to get things done.
Capn_Fish
QUOTE(systemparadox @ Jul 11 2007, 05:01 PM)
What needs to be done is every ROM should come with a working compiler, assembler and make, and each software project should be independent of any distro. Also, I should be able to get the standard mainstream sources for any desktop package and have it work on the Zaurus. We should not be forking all these packages- especially the kernel. I should be able to go to kernel.org and compile the latest version on my Z, and if it doesn't work on my Z for any reason then that's a bug and should be marked and fixed as such.
*

Most sources work that way. You may reach a point where ZGCC segfaults on a bit of code, but cross-compiling usually fixes that. It's mainly large deps that keep me from building certain packages.

[rant]
As for the kernel thing...Even desktop distros patch the kernel, and the Zaurus is a MUCH more specialized piece of hardware, so there is almost no way in the near future you will be able to have a vanilla kernel support all of the Z's hardware to the degree that the patched kernel does. Also, compiling large things on the Z isn't fun. It takes a fair while to build a kernel on my desktop, and the Z isn't even half as fast, nor does it have even a tenth of the memory of the desktop, which will slow down the build a lot.
[/rant]*

I don't mean to rant too much or put you off, and I certainally have moments where I feel the same way you do. Just remember that the Zaurus isn't a desktop, and things won't necessarily work the same way on or for the Z as they do on a desktop.

*This is off the top of my head. I may have errors in there, but it should be mostly correct.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2014 Invision Power Services, Inc.