hi; On 4 December 2011 02:41, John Lindgren <john.lindg...@aol.com> wrote:
> I am wondering what the status of GTK 3 is at this time with regard to bugs > reported by application developers. the status is always the same: bugs reported will be looked at by the gtk maintainers depending on time. you may want to join the #gtk+ IRC channel, on irc.gnome.org if you want to poke a maintainer. > I reported a rather serious bug > (https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=662043) a month and a half ago, > and there is still no comment from any GTK developer. > The bug affects the > Audacious project to the point that we will be forced to go back to using > GTK 2.x if it is not resolved soon. I agree with the conclusion of another > user that this is a bug "breaking [the] UI design" of GTK applications. the source of the issue is that gtk3 does not allow widget underallocations, unlike gtk2. underallocations were a huge source of edge cases, code complexity, and nasty bugs in gtk2 and when the time came to review the size negotiation implementation, and add support for height-for-width and width-for-height, keeping support for underallocations would have made the code balloon out of the maintainership capabilities of the gtk team - as well as introduce new and exciting bugs. this is why setting the minimum size using set_size_request() will not work in your case: the label's minimum size is bigger than the size you requested. long story short: if you want to set the minimum size on a label you can do it with the set_width_chars() method: http://developer.gnome.org/gtk3/stable/GtkLabel.html#gtk-label-set-width-chars ciao, Emmanuele. -- W: http://www.emmanuelebassi.name B: http://blogs.gnome.org/ebassi/ _______________________________________________ gtk-app-devel-list mailing list gtk-app-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-app-devel-list
