Re: opening up work on the BeOS client

Stephen van Egmond (svanegmond nospam at home.com)
Thu, 24 Jun 1999 15:32:44 EDT

>Right after this mail I add as much support for BeOS to the reference
>client as I am possible to do and leave you the commented gaps to
fill. ;)

I'm already miles ahead. I've put definitions in configure and have it
pulling the TOC off the CD.

>Now the details for the BeOS port:
>
>When I found out that BeOS is supported by the configure mechanism
>
> BeBox:BeOS:*:*) # BeOS running on hardware made by Be, PPC
only.
> echo powerpc-be-beos
> exit 0 ;;
> BeMac:BeOS:*:*) # BeOS running on Mac or Mac clone, PPC only.
> echo powerpc-apple-beos
> exit 0 ;;
> BePC:BeOS:*:*) # BeOS running on Intel PC compatible.
> echo i586-pc-beos
> exit 0 ;;
>
>I searched the BeOS site for information on the the CD digital audio
API
>two weeks ago, however I was not successful.

It's pretty primitive - via ioctl. No further documentation (so far) -
"refer to the SCSI standard". Which is fine, they didn't make up
their own, but what I'm geting is baffling. More on that in a sec.

>Please tell me if we need to configure for special hardware, or if
>the API is the same on all (so I can just put '*beos' in configure.in)

The APIs are identical, but the endiannesses are different. The code
I've got already takes care of that (there are macros/functions in the
system to convert whatever-endian to host-endian).

>If you (or I) find out how to interrogate the CD drive, and if you are
>willing to build and test the stuff on your machine (which means you
>must have installed a compiler like gcc) we have BeOS on board in just
>a few days!

The compiler comes standard. :) gcc under BeOS Intel and Metrowerk's
mwcc under the doomed (for BeOS) PowerPC architecture.

>This client will be split into the simple client part
>(cdi_client) and a library part (cdi_lib). We would like to
>move away from GPL to allow the use of the library for authors of
commercial
>players too.

I haven't read the BSD licence closely; I undestand it's more lenient
than the GPL. I didn't know it was applicable to libraries. I'd like
to go through it first - read the fine print, etc. Up till now I was
fine with the LGPL/GPL for the library/client.

(Did anyone register when I suggested directory.mozilla.org/
licence.html as a possible model for the cdindex server-content
licence?)