[maemo-developers] [maemo-developers] running af at 24-bit depth

[From: Eero Tamminen]

Hi,

> So is it easier/better to use Xnest or Xephyr? I am a bit of a n00b when
> it comes to hacking on linux. Coming from the Mac world, linux has so
> many options for so many different things. If I stay with Xnest, because
> it is already installed, how do I change the color depth to 16bit?

It depends a bit how you're using Scratchbox.  If you have it in another
machine and log to that machine, it's easier to use something such as
Xnest and Xvnc that is already part of normal distributions i.e. on the
machine not having the Scratchbox (and other maemo packages).

The remote use-case is mostly relevant only when there are multiple
developers using the same shared Scratchbox setup as it might make
Sbox upgrades easier if you have dozens of developers.


If you already have Scratchbox locally, I think using Xephyr is superior
solution as it supports all the newest X extensions which old Xnvc
and Xnest don't do.  Xnest doesn't even support Xft/Xrender.  But
nothing prevents you from using both, Xephyr for local development
and Xnest (or preferably Xvnc) for remote development.


Btw. I also think that the IP address check should be removed af-sb-init.sh,
it's enough that the documentation demonstarates the DISPLAY variable
value as "DISPLAY=<X server machine IP>:<screen nro>".

Having the IP address in the DISPLAY variable is completely unnecessary
if both the X client and X server are on the same machine and it forces
X to use inet socket for connection instead of the faster unix type of
a socket.  The "problem" with going through inet socket is that it's
different from what happens with the target X server and when doing
embedded development, everything that differentiates your development
environment from the target environment is "bad".

How inet socket usage differentiates from the target:
- XSHM (shared memory e.g. images) cannot be used with inet sockets
- Target X server has disabled inet socket access


	- Eero