I compile a default glade file into the executable and provide a command line option to use a different one. I also compile all custom glyphs into the executable using a similar technique.
I think it is critical to have a single executable that doesn't depend on finding other files at runtime. It is too hard to get all installations correct. Doug On Fri, 2006-06-30 at 14:36 -0500, Jonathon Jongsma wrote: > On 6/30/06, Mohammed Sameer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > [snip] > > On Fri, Jun 30, 2006 at 02:05:12PM -0500, Bob Caryl wrote: > > > Hello all, > > > > > > and because I have a phobia about my executables being > > > dependent on "load files" > > > > I always thought taht keeping such files "outside" the binary is better. > > > > I'm not trying to say that my approach is better than your approach. I'm > > just trying > > to understand the reasons behind your point of view of possible! > > > > It depends on your definition of 'better' :) Having it outside of the > executable is better in the sense that you can just update a text file > to change the UI and not have to recompile the binary. But having it > compiled into the executable is better in the sense that it will never > fail to find the UI definition because of a permission problem or disk > read error, or something like that. So you just have to choose which > one you value more. > _______________________________________________ gtkmm-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtkmm-list
