I think you are right about OpenGLUT moving more towards full-fledged multimedia applications; "freeglut" has no plans in that direction. I am planning to put in borderless windows fairly soon; the idea was bruited about late last year but never made it in. I will be borrowing heavily from the OpenGLUT borderless windows support, so don't make that a reason to choose "freeglut" over OpenGLUT.
If you are looking for some support libraries, I'd like also to let you know about PLIB, which is licensed under LGPL. It is quite mature and includes PUI (Picoscopic User Interface), SL (Sound Library), NET (networking library), JS (Joystick library), SSG (Simple Scene Generator), PW (PLIB Windowing library--a simplified GLUT), PSL (a scripting language about which I know nothing), and a few other components. You won't want to use PW because it only supports a single window, but the other components are very much compatible with *GLUT.
John F. Fay
From: firstname.lastname@example.org [mailto:email@example.com] On Behalf Of Bob Pendleton
Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2004 9:29 AM
Subject: RE: [Freeglut-developer] Sorry to intrude...
On Mon, 2004-10-04 at 13:03, Fay John F Contr AAC/WMG wrote:
> Please excuse the delay in answering you ... unless somebody
> else got to it and I missed the response. I've been out for a week.
Thank you, I appreciate your taking the time to respond.
> The "freeglut" code is being actively maintained. I think
> "developed" is perhaps too strong a word, since most of the
> development goals have been met. The goal of "freeglut" is to be a
> drop-in replacement for GLUT, and (for the GLUT features that people
> actually use) it largely meets that goal. If someone uncovers a bug,
> however, we do try to address it.
> The relationship between "freeglut" and OpenGLUT is one of
> peaceful coexistence. The OpenGLUT founders forked off the "freeglut"
> project early this year because they wanted to add some new features
> that the "freeglut" owner did not want to add. I am relatively active
> in both communities and try to cross-fertilize bug fixes from each
> into the other.
> If you are looking for serious improvements over GLUT, you
> should probably go to OpenGLUT. If you are looking for something more
> stable, you should probably go with "freeglut." OpenGLUT has not had
> a stable (1.0) release yet, although they are actively working towards
> it; "freeglut" has released 2.2 and should probably (when I get my
> most recent round of fixes into CVS and the owner gets some free time)
> make a new release. In the meantime, I would recommend getting the
> latest CVS version.
> If you have any further questions, please go ahead and ask.
I'm working on yet another new scripting language. (Yeah, I'm crazy...)
I need something like *GLUT to handle input and create OpenGL windows. I
need support for multiple windows, sub windows, and borderless windows
eachw ith their own OpenGL context. Along with the standard window
management functions. From looking at freeGLUT and OpenGLUT is looks
like OpenGLUT is moving more in that direction than FreeGLUT is,
>From what I've seen from using GLUT and FreeGLUT, and reading the
OpenGLUT docs it looks like OpenGLUT is moving toward being a full
fledged multimedia application development platform while FreeGLUT is