On Tue, 2002-07-30 at 17:18, Joaquin Cuenca Abela wrote: > > --- Tomas Frydrych <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I have made changes to the UT_RGBcolor class, so > > that it can > > represent a transparent colour -- I have taken the > > approach > > suggested by Joaquin with an extra bool, because it > > makes it > > possible to create a transparent colour that > > otherwise appears to be > > white and that way we do not need to modify the > > graphics classes to > > draw white bacground when the colour is set to > > transparent. > > I've not yet look at your commit, but I was not > suggesting to add a bool to UT_RGBColor, but to > fp_Run. > > Basically, I wanted to keep UT_RGBColor a... RGB > color. As I said, we don't handle transparency all > over our code, so there is no need to change > UT_RGBColor. > > Just add a single boolean to fp_Run to say that its > background is transparent. > > I updated yesterday to current cvs, and I had some > troubles: > > 1) Gtk+ 2: As you may know, gtk+ 2 depends on Xft... > 1, and we use Xft2. That means that if you try to > compile with --enable-xft, you end linking with Xft1 > and Xft2, which is a very bad idea. So say hello to > the new antialiasing in the menu items, say goodbye to > the antialiasing in the main canvas. > > This conflictive linking sometimes work (it worked for > me in little programs), but yesterday xft enabled > abiword was not even starting. AbiWord was finding > its fonts, but pango was not finding any available > font (when gtk+2 apps that don't link with xft2 works > right). > > Maybe it's just a problem with my config, but in > general if someone makes it startup, you should not > hope for anything stable. > > The only possible solution is copy to Xft in our cvs > and rename it. At least now I have a real motivation > to do it :) >
I installed xft2 over the top of the xft in /usr and everything seems to work fine. Performance seems OK on my machine. About 15 seconds to load a 120 page *.abw document with a debug build > 2) Performance was *poor*. Very poor. It was taking > a bit more to open my doc (~3 minutes) than when we > first started with this performance course. I don't > know why it was so slow, but in the stats I had yet > one more time ::find_slot with >20 000 000 calls. > > The "only" differences between my last build and this > one are: > > 1) gtk+ 2 (I'm not suspecting this change) > 2) non Xft (neither this one, but who knows...) > 3) recent, non gtk+2 changes (?) > 4) my own local changed diffed from my old tree and > patched to the new one (?) > > At this point, I had better things to do, like sleep. > I didn't had the time to study where was the problem, > I will investigate it this evening. > > Cheers, > > > ===== > Joaquin Cuenca Abela > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Sign up for SBC Yahoo! Dial - First Month Free > http://sbc.yahoo.com
