Rockbox mail archiveSubject: Re: Volunteering for porting Rockbox
From: Daniel Stenberg (daniel_at_haxx.se)
On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, sophana wrote:
> When you say 'restructure a lot of things' did you mean restructure
Perhaps. I think the point is the same. Move around lots of source code to
> When I have a look into rockbox architecture, it is so much related to the
Then you have less belief in the Rockbox coding department than I have.
We have not been forced to deal with this level of portability in the Rockbox
> A good example is the display: between the players and recorders, there are
Yes? #ifdefs is part of portable programming.
> A common architecture is not so easy to find... Or should I say the most
POSIX is not an architecture, it is a set of API:s. We have already tried to
> I know linux is not the smallest kernel ever seen. But there should be other
What would be the benefit of porting Rockbox over to a new kernel? It already
> One other big difference between hardware platforms is the memory size: if
32MB ram should be able to run basicly any OS except windows! ;-)
Sure, if booting Linux on a device and having it run there is easier, quicker
But, compared to for example the ipodlinux effort as documented on their site,
> Bringing an open source kernel into the archos should be the first stage in
I don't see why you think the kernel is the biggest portability issue. I think
> seems that avos have made a lot of work. they can play mp3 without rockbox.
IIRC, the AV-series use a MAS for mp3.
-- Daniel Stenberg -- http://rockbox.haxx.se/ -- http://daniel.haxx.se/ _______________________________________________ http://cool.haxx.se/mailman/listinfo/rockbox
Page was last modified "Jan 10 2012" The Rockbox Crew